“Do you know what she did today?" He leaned confidentially across the table, pointing at the dishes in the sink. "She went to the market and left all the breakfast dishes there and said she'd do them later. I know what she wanted. She expected me to do them. Well, I'll fool her. I'll leave them just where they are.” ― Ayn Rand link
TWW is becoming increasingly concerned about the position of women within churches and organizations which stress manhood. It is becoming apparent to us that when the role of men in the churches is highlighted, the role of women in churches is diminished no matter how much the men emphasize that women and men are equal in value in the eyes of God.
Women are viewed as uni-dimensional: usually in role of married, submissive wife.
In this post 10 THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT FEMALE SUBMISSION by Sam Storms and featured at the The Gospel Coalition, Storm states the post is about female submission yet he only deals with women who are married. The never married, divorced, or widowed women do not appear to be on his radar. So this post is merely about the view he has have married women, despite the misleading title. Here is the quote at the beginning of the post.
In an earlier post we looked at 10 things all should know about male headship as it is found in Scripture. Today we look at female submission.
The problem of domestic violence of women seems to be downplayed in the wifely role and instead women are cautioned not to do anything that is harmful to her husband.
Quoting again from Sam Storm's post:
It does mean, however, that she ought never to do anything which would be detrimental or harmful to her husband or that would cause her to neglect her primary ministry of helping her husband
Women are expected to submit in order to help men to reach their full potential.
I am confused. The examples appear to be actions and attitudes required by both husband and wife. Once again, quoting from Sam Storm's post:
Submission is a commitment to support one's husband in such a way that he may reach his full potential as a man of God. This may involve several things, such as making the home a safe place, free from the sinful influence of the world; striving to be dependable and trustworthy (Prov. 31:11-12); providing affirmation and encouragement; building loyalty to him in the children (differences of opinion about discipline should be settled in private, away from the children, lest she be seen as taking sides against her husband); and showing confidence in his decisions
Men are often prioritized over women within the church.
There are many examples of this. Here is one from a recent article What do you do when your church is not revitalizing? written by Scott Slayton on the SBTS (Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) blog. SBTS is the home of the Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Guess who the pastor needs to prioritize? Women are not mentioned in any specific way. This post appears to suggest that females are not important to helping churches in trouble.
Be faithful to disciple men in your church. You don’t have to have a formal curriculum and a three-year growth track. Start meeting with guys to read through the Bible or a good book together. Pray for each other and talk about life. Bring them along with you as you go on hospital visits. If they live close to you, invite them over and model hospitality. Live life alongside each other, teaching them as you go.
Does Fellowship Memphis and John Bryson accuse women of persecuting, feminizing and demeaning men? Is that why they gave women cutesy dish towels on Mother's Day?
In a recent discussion with another former member, I was told that John Bryson isn't particularly strong in the women's area. This is reiterated in Ex-Acts 29 Board Member John Bryson Hires Private Investigator After Allegations He Covered for Voyeur Pastor published by The Christian Post in which a disturbing allegation is made.
The victim, however, insists that Bryson also enables a culture of misogynistic behavior towards women in his church evidenced in the gifting of "dish rags" to women in his church for Mother's Day.
"John Bryson often preaches about the role of women and mothers that lead to men being persecuted, weakened and turned into women. He has taught classes for men in the church and at Downline Ministries on how to stand up to women, their mothers and their wives. Fellowship Memphis was hostile towards women, their role in the church and in families, the church even passed out dish rags to all the women of the church for Mother's Day! Rick Trotter spent years attending John Bryson's men's training called Fight Club. It's no wonder this issue was swept under the rug," the victim said.
Could a perceived negative attitude towards women lead Fellowship Memphis and John Bryson to downplay the female related voyeurism by Rick Trotter?
This possibility is something that has crossed my mind as I have learned more about this church and their associates. Rick Trotter was trained in the men's groups through Fellowship Memphis. Could it be that they saw voyeurism directed towards women as not particularly important? If that is a false perspective then why did Downtown Church have no problem rehiring him?
Also, in light of the Rick Trotter episodes, why did John Bryson decide that handing out cutesy kitchen towels would be wise? Is he so male oriented that he could not perceive how this could interpreted by others?
John Bryson and Authentic Manhood
In Dec, 2015, long before we learned about Rick Trotter, Bryan Loritts and John Bryson, we wrote a post discussing Fellowship Associates which included mention of John Bryson. Fellowship Associates is a group of church associated with Fellowship Memphis which is apparently considered the headquarters for Fellowship Associates.
We will discuss these ties in more depth on Wednesday. Needless to say, it involves the usual suspects. In the meantime, it is worth reviewing our earlier post reprinted below in its entirety.
The Many Associations of 'Authentic Manhood' That Surround Fellowship Associates
"I have a love interest in every one of my films – a gun."- Arnold Schwarzenegger link
screen shot Pastors learning to be authentic™men.
As you know, the two of us hold MBAs. We are often critiqued for our seemingly dogged look at how evangelical organizations do business. We are also big on "following the money" and take a particular interest in how churches and parachurch organization spend their money on salaries and infrastructure.
Approximately two years ago we received an email from a professor at a major university who told us that he found our blog informative about the trends of evangelicalism in the last 3 decades. He used our blog to track down further information for a book he was writing on the recent history of the evangelical faith.
So, besides exposing abusive church practices and warning people about the legalities of church contracts (cleverly called church covenants), we like to explore structure. For example, the Dino Rizzo debacle caused us to look carefully at the ARC which led to some fascinating posts on their beliefs surrounding demonism, etc. Of course, these associations are not pleased when we look more closely since they no longer fly under the radar.
We contend that there is a playbook which members of these tightly ties groups use to answer questions. In some respects, the statement of FBC Brentwood regarding their lawsuit sounded like other such statements that we have heard over the last few years. We looked at their church due to the allegations of alleged mismanagement of the molestation of a 3 year old child at this church.
However, the more we looked, the more we began to realize that there are alliances between this church and other organizations. Thanks to a reader, we discovered that Bill Wellons Sr., the father of the pastor of FBC, Bill Wellons, had spoken at Redeemer Church of Dubai, the church of John Folmar which was a plant from UCCD. and an integral part of 9 Marks.This was the former church home of our poorly treated, official TWW hero, Todd Wilhelm.
This means there are ties to 9 Marks. Who cares? Well, the Deebs do. 9 Marks is a tightly run ship and one can be sure that those who are invited to speak are onboard with the theology of the organization. For example, we call UCCD and Capital Hill Baptist Church *the Hotel California of church discipline* since once you sign their contract,, you cannot leave without following their restrictive guidelines. If you do not follow them to the letter, you are placed in church discipline, which they *winsomely* call *the care list.* (banging head on table.) There is no place for rights of conscience with this crowd.
Why should we care about Bill Wellons Sr. and Fellowship Associates?
Because there are close ties between daddy and son. We discovered that Fellowship Bible Church (of which Bill Wellons JR is pastor) is participating in a larger organization known as Fellowship Associates. What is that?
From their website:
Fellowship Associates exists to call men into Authentic Manhood and to train leaders to plant churches.
1. Who is on their team?
For now we will focus on Bill Wellons Sr.
Bill Wellons is a church planter, consultant and principal of Fellowship Associates. In 1977, Bill and his wife, Carolyn, helped found Fellowship Bible Church in Little Rock, where he served as a Teaching Pastor and Chairman of the Elder Board for thirty-two years. Bill transitioned to Fellowship Associates in 2005 to oversee the Leadership Residency for church planters, consult with church leaders, and train new Residency Directors.
2. What do they do?
It is one more Gospel™ based church planting group. (How many of these are there?!!)
The Residency Program is decentralized and gathers twice monthly for three days over seven months…September through March. The Residency focuses on Leadership issues such as Self-Awareness, Gospel-centered Ecclesiology, Leadership Development, “best practices” and “how to’s” of local church leadership. Along with the Fellowship Associates partners and staff, the Fellowship Network of 70 + church leaders and other strategic partners share wisdom and invest in our Residents.
Our cohort model allows for mentor and peer learning. We have over fifteen years of experience hosting a Residency Programs and have trained over 70 men. Our partner churches multiply our ability to pass along lessons learned and best practices.
Our thinking toward every Resident we train includes:
- How can we equip and prepare this Resident to plant a church that plants churches?
- How can we build into this Resident so that he catalyzes church planting in whatever city and region he plants?
- How can we prepare this Resident to create a residency in the future and train other church planters?
What excites us? The gospel multiplied through healthy leaders that plant healthy churches that build healthy leaders to plant other healthy churches.
3. Who are the partners?
Here are just a few:
- Acts 29
- The Village Church
- Crossway
- The Austin Stone
- Fellowship Memphis (added 0905/16)
4. Who are their alumni?
Here are just a couple. The list is quite long.
- Dave Furman Redeemer Church of Dubai Dubai, UAE (9Marks)
- Bill Wellons, JR. Fellowship Bible Church Brentwood, TN
5. They quote Acts 29 for qualifications for leaders.
This is intentional as you will see.
Acts 29 also listed some helpful characteristics of a church planter in his list of Entrepreneurial Aptitude Micro-Skills:
- Has demonstrated past successes in starting new ventures.
- Is an innovative and strategic visionary.
- Is highly energetic and enthused about starting a new work.
- Shows ability to enlist others in new ventures.
- Evidences being a self-starter.
- Has a willingness to work intensely for an extended period of time.
What is Authentic Manhood?
1. This is a program pushed by Fellowship Associates and linked to on their website.
Authentic Manhood is all about setting men up to live lives of truth, passion and purpose. Our resources offer clear and practical Biblical insights on God’s design for manhood that are both refreshing and inspiring. We point men to a gospel-centered vision of life that sets them up to enjoy God’s grace as they pursue the promises of His Word.
2. Who is involved in the leadership and support of this group?
No surprises here.
MATT CHANDLER
Matt Chandler is lead pastor of Teaching at The Village Church, a multi-campus congregation in the Dallas/Fort Worth region of Texas, and president of Acts 29, a worldwide church-planting organization with more than four hundred churches in the U.S. and networks of churches in multiple countries.
JOHN BRYSON
Along with being a Teaching Pastor and Elder at Fellowship Memphis, John serves on the board of Acts29 and as a church planting coach with Fellowship Associates.
BRYAN CARTER
Bryan Carter taught the original Men’s Fraternity curriculum to a group of more than 800 men over a three-year period at Concord Church.
You might appreciate the ties that Chandler enunciates on TVC website.
Partner
We team up with organizations like Acts 29, where Matt currently sits as president, and Fellowship Associates to help plant churches that plant churches.
What is the Men's Fraternity?
This has close ties to Fellowship Associates which pushes this material through Authentic Manhood.,
Men's Fraternity Classic is the original curriculum authored by Dr. Robert Lewis that helped launch the Authentic Manhood movement. Men's Fraternity Classic is a series of three one-year-long studies, beginning with The Quest for Authentic Manhood (24 weeks), followed by Authentic Manhood: Winning at Work and Home (16 weeks), and concluding with The Great Adventure series (20 weeks). More than just a rally or a Bible study, Men's Fraternity provides men with an encouraging process that teaches them how to live lives of authentic manhood as modeled by Jesus Christ and directed by the Word of God.
Men's Fraternity was designed to help men come together and strengthen each other through weekly sessions that combine biblical teaching and small group interaction.
These time-tested resources have been used all over the world to equip men to make their pursuit of noble manhood a lifelong priority. Church leaders and lay members are using the series to energize the men of their church and to connect with men in the community. Many men also use the series in their own personal pursuit of authentic manhood.
There is a tie to Bill Wellons SR even in the endorsements. The current leadership of FBC Little Rock, the church Wellons founded, endorse this, naturally.
Paul Chapman, a member of Fellowship Bible Church in Little Rock, shares about his "faith journey" and how Men's Fraternity played an integral part in bringing him to Christ.
What is the Leadership Collective?
These groups not only benefit the pastor, but also his congregation: Pastors in formal peer groups lead congregations that serve the church, reach out to others, and grow at higher rates than churches with pastors that don’t participate in peer groups.
The Leaders Collective facilitates lead pastor cohorts that spend two years considering the characteristics necessary to promote healthy, sustainable ministry. These cohorts of six pastors—all in similar places of life and ministry— will meet together once a quarter for two years to consider these characteristics together through unique experiences, time with recognized experts in the field, and time building into one another the encouragement we all need to sustain fruitful ministry.
Here are a few that you should find interesting.
- Bill Wellons Sr
- Jamie Munson: Formerly of Mars Hill Church
- Justin Holcomb: Formerly of Mars Hill Church
- Elliott Grudem: Wayne's son
Look carefully at the resume for Munson and Holcomb. Do you see anything about Mars Hill mentioned? Shhhh…
Who is endorsing this collective?
1. A Sovereign Grace Ministry pastor:
Ian McConnell Pastor for Preaching & Vision, Grace City Church / Director of Church Planting & Mission, Sovereign Grace Churches
I’m thankful for the way the Leaders Collective allows me to learn from men in other networks doing the same gospel mission.
2. Acts 29
Brian Lowe Lead Pastor, Exodus Church / Acts 29 Network Director for the U.S. Southeast
It is good to have people speak honestly into your life about areas where you need to grow. I find few people are willing to speak the truth to me. Having men around me who will is invaluable. It is [also] good to be able to laugh. My cohort was not together long before laughing began…and that is good medicine.
Finally, we have already discussed the ties to The Gospel Coalition on the part of Bill Wellons JR.
Even CBMW is getting in on the act
Whoops-almost forgot to tell you that the Council of Biblical™ Manhood and Womanhood really likes some of the material pushed by Authentic Manhood and even links to their site.
So, let's go ahead and review the links:
- TGC
- Acts 29 (DD, AD -during Driscoll and after Driscoll)
- 9Marks
- The Village Church and Matt Chandler
- Jamie Munson and Justin Holcomb, formerly of Mars Hill
- Various Fellowship Bible Churches
- Fellowship Associates
- Authentic Manhood
- Men's Fraternity
- Leadership Collective
- Crossway (the publisher of the ESV)
- The Austin Stone
- SGM
- CBMW
- and a whole boatload of folks in the Raleigh area which we will get to on another post.
Talk about sharing DNA.!Deb suggested a name for these groups, C4, which stands for Cookie Cutter Calvinista Coalition. It has play.
A question
It appears these some of these groups are supported by the churches which pay to send their pastors to "one more conference." So, do the financiers of these programs, meaning the church tithers, ever question what their money is being used for? And what about the money…who is making what? And why do we need so many groups all doing the same sort of thing?
The picture at the top of the page of men learning to be men
So, a weird thing happened this week. Deb was supposed o do this post on Monday but the Fellowship Associates went down for quite a while. Deb and I took screenshots of this picture of the boys running around with guns. It used to be up on the Leadership Collective (doesn't that name remind you of the old Soviet Union?) Apparently this a picture of a scene from one their "pastors" intensive learning experiences. The Leadership Collective is obviously updating their website as you will see if you click on the link under the picture.
So, enjoy the advanced weapons training, boys. You must really need to keep those church members in line. BTW, your adorable blog queens have concealed weapons permits issues by the state of NC. Does that make us authentic women?
First…??
I know a couple of the men in that pic…
I do not have that much of a problem with Sam Storms article (pardon my lack of punctuation as my keyboard has a messed up apostrophe key.)
I have been around for decades and seen just about everything when it comes to what is taught re the submission of wives to husbands. His article is a good corrective to a lot of what I consider abuses in that area, and it is in a location where it can do some good. That said I will be so glad when male preachers get off that hobbyhorse and start addressing in depth and often what Jesus has said about how men should care for their wives. So much of what I have seen in the church world is more about coddling male ego and enabling male arrogance than it is about walking as Jesus would have us walk. Jesus is the very expression of God and He treated women extremely well-He showed us Gods tender heart towards us. I have seen examples of marriages where the man really did treat his wife as Christ does the Church and where the wife stands along side him as they work together to achieve what God has formed and fashioned them both to do. It is beautiful. My leanings probably are pretty close to what that stated article says -I used to be way more conservative to the detriment of my marriage. If I had seen that article years ago it would have saved me a lot of grief. However I do agree with much of what I see on THIS website because I do see a lot of ministries that act as if the man is everything and the woman an afterthought. That is not how God sees it and it is not how my church sees it, thankfully!
I keep saying this. But we ladies and gentlemen who believe that Christian women should be treated with respect in our churches need to slam our wallets shut and STOP GIVING our money to disrespectful churches and their equally disrespectful leadership.
Walk our the door. Take yourself out for a nice Sunday breakfast.
“He has taught classes for men in the church and at Downline Ministries on how to stand up to women, their mothers and their wives.”
Downline? Isn’t that an old Amway term. Everyone of these organizations have MLM type structures. And somebody has to always be at the bottom. Ready made for women?
I have barely started reading, and I have to stop to comment.
In this post 10 THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT FEMALE SUBMISSION by Sam Storms and featured at the The Gospel Coalition, Storm states the post is about female submission yet he only deals with women who are married. The never married, divorced, or widowed women do not appear to be on his radar.So this post is merely about the view he has have married women, desptite the misleading title.
My overriding thought at reading this was, “Lucky (single) women!”
It becomes clearer to me every day, why our daughters, raised in this environment, have declared that they have no interest in ever getting married.
They may commit themselves to loving relationships, but they won’t look twice at guys from complementarian families, being raised in that atmosphere. No matter how nice, how kind, how hard-working, how (fill in the blank with “worthy” adjectives), any such guys are completely out of the question.
I even think they’d go so far as to wish eternal bachelorhood on those guys, just so that complementarian christianity would go the way of the Shakers.
“Men are often prioritized over women within the church.”
Matt Chandler puts it this way regarding his ministry at The Village Church: “I preach to men.” That’s pretty simple, pretty clear, on where this comp king stands. He refers to female church members as “our girls.” Unfortunately, a lot of young Calvinist pastors idolize Chandler and take his lead on gender roles.
I don’t recall Jesus or the Apostles saying anything like “I preach to men, so our girls just need to get over it.”
From the OP:
Yeah, about that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtUWs6muGzg
I can’t take this “Authentic Manhood” seriously since reading about Promise Keepers attendees visiting the strip clubs in Tampa.
I wonder how many of these characters have links to the Leadership Network?
Mark Driscoll once said that LN essentially spawned the emergent movement by linking the who’s-who of that group (Brian McLaren, Donald Miller, Rob Bell, Driscoll, etc.). I suspect that LN has had an indirect role in the New Calvinist movement as well. I know that Matt Chandler has been involved in LN over the years. With a little investigation, other New Calvinist notables might be identified as having benefited from LN networking.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
Or even this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9fF8yptn8E
“It does mean, however, that she ought never to do anything which would be detrimental or harmful to her husband or that would cause her to neglect her primary ministry of helping her husband ”
(Sarcasm alert) Yup. Slaves in the U.S. neglected their primary ministry of serving their masters, and look how that turned out.
“Submission is a commitment to support one’s husband in such a way that he may reach his full potential as a man of God.”
(Sarcasm alert #2). Yup. Because women clearly have no potential.
(Sarcasm alert off)
Been lurking here since forever, former member of CovLife and an Acts 29 church. Thanks for the work you do here. I’m also a gun guy, and that pic of the 3 hipster pastors stacking up with rifles always cracks me up, such an anachronism. Guns without magazines, and judging from the blue plastic visible in the ejection ports, the bolt carriers have been removed. Not really sure what’s going on, but whoever’s in charge really, really, doesn’t trust them. Not a hair out of place on those guys though, and just the right amount of fashionable filth on that white T-shirt.
Ted wrote:
Hahaha! I love it!
@ Velour:
Velour, I say this all the time. Do not think that you are going to be the agent of change because they do not want to change. The only way to change a church organization like that is to starve the beast! Take your energy,money and spiritual mojo to a place that will do good with it. Shake the dust off your sandals and go!!!
I do not think the current leaders of the SBC will ever realize the damage they have done all because they would not “allow” women to use their God given talents.
Add fellowship bible church to the list of ‘churches I’ve attended that made tww!’, along with chbc and gateway. Goodness!
>Submission is a commitment to support one’s husband in such a way that he may reach his full potential as a man of God.
Places in the bible where a woman is told that her whole job is to help men reach their potential? 0 by my count.
These guys must have really low opinions of their wives, daughters, mothers, and sisters. And I guess after John 2, Jesus would need to be told how to stand up to his mother.
“Submission is a commitment to support one’s husband in such a way that he may reach his full potential as a man of God.”
Well, let’s rephrase that a bit to illustrate the way it’s supposed to work in the Kingdom of God: “Submission is a commitment to each other in such a way that we all may reach our full potential as children of God.”
In the Kingdom, each believer – male and female – has a part. Mature Christians recognize, appreciate, and accept individual giftings in order that the Body of Christ may function in oneness. In the Kingdom, there are no distinctions in race, class, or gender … we are all one in Christ.
“From Him the whole body [the church, in all its various parts], joined and knitted firmly together by what every joint supplies, when each part is working properly, causes the body to grow and mature, building itself up in [unselfish] love” (Ephesians 4:16 AMP).
Even the title “Authentic Manhood” is suggestive of a power play: they get to interpret/define what that means. I have grown especially skeptical of organizations that push for “authentic” manhood or womanhood. How many sermons from Jesus were strictly about how to be a “man” or a “woman?” Just something to consider if one claims the name “Christian.”
Divorce Minister wrote:
If you have to teach someone how to be something, it is no longer authentic! Drives me crazy.
“I do not think the current leaders of the SBC will ever realize the damage they have done all because they would not “allow” women to use their God-given talents.”
Mot I don’t think they care at all. At least the Mohler borg clan don’t care. He had a calling(tm) from God to clean house and to be a prophet and all that hogwash. What he did to the SBC and to individual teacher/student lives was/is horrid.
Velour wrote:
I totally agree, but so many women, and men, believe this idiocy. Some also just don’t care and are there only for the social aspect, bless their clueless little hearts.
mot wrote:
They don’t care. After all, women are just women, you know.
“Catalyzing Change Agents
About 30 years ago, Buford pioneered Leadership Network and began to influence the influencers. He invested his time to train the trainers. He sought to create learning communities that might foster mutual learning among high capacity leaders. He did this early on with men like Bill Hybels, Rick Warren, and Robert Lewis.” Ed Stetzer
http://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2014/april/catalyst-that-fostered-movement.html
I really think that in the back, or the front, of their minds, Fellowship doesn’t care about the voyer because women are made for men, “the Bible is clear on this” TM, so why shouldn’t a man look at women who clearly exist for him. If you disagree, you’re just bitter and angry.
Max wrote:
I like that. I think these “Authentic Manhood” folks take themselves ridiculously too seriously. My husband walked in while I watched the video that Ted linked above, and he saw me watch a few Aretha Franklin videos. Does he get offended? On the contrary, he decides we should watch The Blues Brothers tonight. That’s what happens when nobody is trying to be The Boss.
I think comps cleverly utilize a diversionary tactic. By keeping the focus on the submission of wives, they divert attention away from the fact that there is not one command in scripture for a husband to have authority over his wife. The tactic normally works as their fictitious boundaries for women get more and more bizarre and results in more defensive refuting rather than challenging the husband’s authority from scripture which is the real issue.
Talking about how women should devote their lives to helping their husbands reach their full potential, and not the other way around, I once saw on TBN a so-called minister say just that. Talk about a misinterpretation of verse whatever of 1st Corinthians (woman is made for man and man is not made for woman). Oh, and I did not linger long on TBN. I didn’t want to lose any IQ points.
By the way, what is it with these groups and church planting? It’s like spreading a cancer.
@ bunny:
“I will be so glad when male preachers get off that hobbyhorse and start addressing in depth and often what Jesus has said about how men should care for their wives.”
++++++++++++++++++++++
hi, bunny.
Wondering if you could point me to the verses where Jesus is quoted as commenting on such things.
elastigirl wrote:
I was wondering the same thing.
“So, enjoy the advanced weapons training, boys. You must really need to keep those church members in line. BTW, your adorable blog queens have concealed weapons permits issues by the state of NC. Does that make us authentic women?”
They’ll say it makes you angry, bitter, gossip-mongering Jezebels. Then they’ll ask to speak to your husbands and your ministers. You can respond by blowing them a raspberry.
Patriciamc wrote:
The hard part for me is I remember a day when SBC leaders did care about women!
Victorious wrote:
They’ll totally ignore everything else in Ephesians and say that “head” means boss regardless of its context, regardless of what Jesus taught, and so on. We’ve all seen their dog and pony show before.
Patriciamc wrote:
I totally agree with you, by the way.
mot wrote:
I know, and it used to be a really good denomination.
Patriciamc wrote:
I am still in the SBC only because God called me to a church that is still in this denomination. The Director of Missions was very influential in having an associational church kicked out that dared to call a woman a few years ago. I try the best I know how to preach the Word of God each Sunday and to love everyone that is this church.
I do know the cost of standing up for a woman pastor as it was very much the reason I resigned from my previous Southern Baptist church.
This was several years ago but the pain is still very real for me and I even dreamed very recently about my having to leave the church I currently serve for the same reason.
@ mot:
“The hard part for me is I remember a day when SBC leaders did care about women!”
+++++++++++
so, when did the change happen? how? why? who?
i’m continually amazed at how the pursuit of God/Jesus/Holy Spirit causes people to devolve.
sure isn’t God’s fault.
my conclusion: too many cooks spoil the stew. too many professional christians with too much time on their hands, ever finding new ways to spin elaborate conjecture into ‘God saith’, and turning it into new products to sell.
but back to my original question….. what happened??
@ mot:
“The Director of Missions was very influential in having an associational church kicked out that dared to call a woman a few years ago…..
I do know the cost of standing up for a woman pastor as it was very much the reason I resigned from my previous Southern Baptist church.”
++++++++++++++++++
you’re my hero.
this director of missions nincompoop (to be polite) — would you be able to challenge him to kick out associational churches that pander to sexual predators, just like he did to the church with a woman in leadership?
@ elastigirl:
“so, when did the change happen? how? why? who?”
+++++++++++
i mean, i’ve been reading here (and many places) for quite a while and I know the history of that thing called the ‘conservative resurgence’, all the calvinista bullsht, the ETS & ESS, CBMW, the whole sordid tale and the whole cast of monstrous characters (silly acronyms & all).
but, since you’ve lived through the transformation (from good & honorable to arrogant dikheads) (not you, mind you…. of course not you), when did you notice a change? what was it like?
Divorce Minister wrote:
Can I get an Amen?!
This is an overview of Memphis Second Presbyterian Church, Sandy Willson, Dr. Nan Hawkes church discipline, and the Evangelical Presbyterian Church.
https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2016/09/06/an-overview-of-sandy-willson-and-memphis-second-presbyterian-church-plus-when-individuals-like-c-j-carolyn-mahaney-and-steve-estes-are-promoted-does-that-help-transplant-an-unhealthy-culture-at-ri/
mot wrote:
It sounds like a PTSD reaction, and very understandable. In standing up for a woman pastor, you did the right thing in God’s eyes. Many hugs and pats on the back for you!
I have posted a new update on the open discussion thread.
Thank yu all so much for your continued support – financial, prayer, and encouragement. It is priceless to my.
Velour, thank you for keeping track of all of us who have needs. It means a lot.
http://thewartburgwatch.com/open-discussion-page/comment-page-14/#comment-280360
Lea wrote:
Deborah and Barak????
Max wrote:
Amen, Max. Amen.
Nancy2 wrote:
Oh not, mentioning Deborah is a huge no no, particularly since she was in authority over Barak. I’m sure the neo-cons will bend over backwards and stand on their heads to twist scripture to show how Deborah was all wrong.
Patriciamc wrote:
Then how about Samson and Delilah? If it hadn’t been for Delilah, Samson never would have been in a position to push those pillars down and take out thousands of Philistines.
(Sarcasm is oozing from every pore of my body …. just as it was when I suggested Deborah and Barak)
My husband was attending a small Bible church until they brought in the Authentic Manhood thing. He went online and watched the first group of videos and found so much error and danger, he just couldn’t take it. The whole thing is an exercise in logical fallacies. And nothing to do with Jesus or knowing him better or following him. There is persistent pressure to open up and divulge your deepest secrets in these groups. “Manhood” is a pathetic cliche stereotype, no allowance is made for differences in temperament- all men are alike, cut out of a cookie cutter. It’s also deeply insulting, assuming that every man is a complete failure and in need of these phonies’ guidance.
Patriciamc wrote:
Which makes me wonder …… do these narcissistic “overripe boys” really believe that women actually have souls? We’re just some service animal-fragile vessel hybrids. Genesis 2:7 says God breathed the breath of life into man, and he became a living soul —- that was before God created Eve.
From the post:
I’ve known a few women who “built loyalty in the children” for husbands who were not deserving and it worked out very badly in the end. Don’t cover up for your husband and make him look like something more than he is, it’s never right or healthy to lie. Let your kids know their father for who he really is. You can love and respect him while also being truthful. Also, if you never disagree and work out a compromise in front of your children, they will never learn how to do this by your example and this will handicap them in life.
So often I go back to one of my favorite Bible passages: “no lie is of the truth” (1 John 2:21). We are called to speak the truth in love. Be yourself; be honest. Strive to be more like Jesus but be honest about who you are. There is no real connection going on when a person is hidden behind a fake persona. It’s better to be connected to a real dad with flaws than to have a pretend perfect dad who doesn’t really exist and a home full of tension because reality doesn’t go away when you’re pretending. The truth slips out in myriad ways and you end up gaslighting your kids.
And they call this “authentic”…
siteseer wrote:
To me, this is manipulation and subtle blackmail once these deep secrets are shared.
Nancy2 wrote:
Well, you know, God was forced to use Deborah because there were ‘no good men available’ (pfft). Poor God, he had to make do with a woman. Of course, God being sovereign and ordaining everything that happens, I’m not sure how it happened that there were no men available? But we mustn’t question the leaders. lol
Lydia wrote:
Downline Ministries is the has a lot of crossover with both Fellowship Memphis and another church here called Harvest Church. It’s a ministry training/education organization (business). Memphis is a Gospelly™ part of the country.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
Four great religious truths:
1) Muslims don’t recognize Jews as God’s chosen people.
2) Jews don’t recognize Jesus as the Messiah.
3) Protestants don’t recognize the pope as the leader of the Christian church.
and 4) Baptists don’t recognize each other at Hooters.
siteseer wrote:
I think that these groups practice Thought Reform techniques, which includes demanding peoples’ deepest, darkest secrets, having someone(s) in authority over you make your major (and minor) life decisions because you aren’t capable of them. The lack of basic, adult healthy boundaries. This is cult behavior.
Here is Steve Hassan’s description of Thought Reform in high-demand groups.
Hassan is a psychologist, author, and expert in cults and Thought Reform. He has studied the work of Dr. Robert Jay Lifton, a psychiatrist at Yale University. Dr. Lifton had been a psychiatrist in the Air Force and researched Chinese Communist Thought Reform techniques. Other Authoritiarian groups use the same methods to control people.
https://www.freedomofmind.com/Info/BITE/bitemodel.php
Brad/FuturistGuy’s excellent article about Dr. Robert Jay Lifton’s study of Thought Reform techniques: https://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/the-hunger-games-trilogy-5a/
Jeannette Altes wrote:
Hi Jeannette,
You’re welcome! It’s my little ministry. Prayer, needs, and visitation (which I can’t do in person so I do online).
Love and hugs,
Velour from California
preacher’s wife wrote:
Well Bruce Ware believes that women are a derivative image of God and not made in the image of God. Ware’s beliefs are not found in Genesis.
So according to Ware’s (il)logic, his own mother was made in the derivative image of God, got pregant with Bruce, carried him, gave birth to him, raised him. And while she’s not made in the image of God…voila he his made in the image of God. Really, cheeky.
mot wrote:
Nor do they realize how much they have mocked the Giver of Gifts through their contempt for the talents of the women. The pride of these men grows with every act of contemptuous ‘subordination’ of women. It’s a self-consuming pride and in many of these ‘male-headship’ gurus, we can see that the end result is corruption on a personal and organizational scale.
The harm the ‘head-ship’ men do stands witness to the ‘power’ of their ‘headship’ alright:
their ‘power’ is used to deny an innate dignity in others that was not theirs to give or take away. They mock the very God that gave that dignity to all human persons, and in doing so, they have tried to make ‘gods’ of themselves. This is so far from ‘manly’ that it defies all attempts to make it ‘honorable’.
Their only hope? Well, the glorious old mother Sojourner Truth had a word about that: she said, ‘the womens are comin up and they are bringing the mens up with them’
Time for the women of the Church to show forth the dignity that God has given them, and to speak with the authority of human persons whose dignity is no longer available for use as some pitiful pawn in a ‘male-headship’ game.
I think the greatest reason to do this is not so much to save the men from themselves, as to save the children who are watching this whole nightmare. If THEY can be spared, then women have great reason to speak up and speak out with dignity.
“Submission is a commitment to support one’s husband in such a way that he may reach his full potential as a man of God.”
Now as they went on their way, Jesus entered a village. And a woman named Martha welcomed him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet and listened to his teaching. But Martha was distracted with much serving. And she went up to him and said, “Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Tell her then to help me.” But the Lord answered her, “Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things, but one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the good portion, which will not be taken away from her.”
–Luke 10:38-42
Patriciamc wrote:
Unfortunately, most are not that savvy. They just say “She doesn’t count!” just like they say “That verse doesn’t count!” to verses like Ephesians 5:21.
This movement isn’t really biblically-based. They just say they’re “more biblical” to shut down detractors without engaging them, and attract people who haven’t really studied the Bible for themselves (so they can tell them what to believe).
Christiane wrote:
Very well said!
elastigirl wrote:
I will try and reply later today. Thanks for asking me.
elastigirl wrote:
I can say that it goes back at least to the early 80s. The official founding of the CBMW was 1987, but that group had secret meetings at ETS for a number of years (which they know admit publically). I think there’s probably always been a Charles Spurgeon Calvinista following the SBC, and I think this group used the CBMW to organize the Calvinista takeover.
The conservative resurgence wasn’t started by the Calvinistas, but by Jerry Fallwell and Paige Patterson in the 60s. The stated purpose was mainly inerrancy and literal Bible interpretation, but there was a heavy focus on traditional family structures. It was a marriage of the independent Baptist fundamentalists and the SBC inerrantists. Fallwell promised to join his church to the SBC if the changes were implemented, which he did at the 2000 SBC convention. A bunch of other independent Baptist churches followed afterward.
I think the Calvinistas used the Resurgence to implement the changes they wanted in the Baptist Faith & Message in 2000, but the conservatives had no idea that the Calvinistas were then going to use that to systematically force a takeover. Mohler, who became chancellor of SBTS in 1993, carefully supported the conservative resurgence, in part because they had more similar beliefs, but also I think because there was a whole lot political power there in the SBC. The more moderate and liberal SBC churches mostly split off to make the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship after the 2000 BFM revision.
The takeover started just after the changing of the BFM. I worked at NAMB in 2001, and staff started changing rapidly. At the time, I don’t think anyone quite knew what was going on. I went to SEBTS in 2003, and in 2004 Patterson was moved to SWBTS to make room for the Calvinista-aligned Akin, who was put there by Mohler. Subsequently, every other SBC institution has been restaffed with Mohler motivating all of the appointments.
A big question is how the SBC allowed Mohler to have so much power, and why they continue to do so?! The churches are supposed to have voting power to control all these things, but the resolutions committee has been stacked with Calvinistas, so any resolution which doesn’t benefit them is refused.
ishy wrote:
Many books have been written about what has happened to the SBC. I am going to give a very short version. In 1979 when the SBC was focused to try and take the Gospel to the whole world Paige Patterson and Paul Pressler came up with a plan to TAKEOVER the SBC. There worry was that the SBC was becoming “liberal.” Sadly there plan worked and many people’s lives were changed in a major way and they were “removed” from the SBC.
The regular pew sitter knew nothing about this then and sadly I do not think they do today.
A big part of the TAKEOVER was the rewriting of the Baptist Faith and Message as it relates to women.
The men and women who were complicit in this TAKEOVER seem to care little as what they did to a once great convention.
My little whining last night is only a thimble full of suffering as compared to many others that last their jobs as pastors, missionary jobs, etc because of this evil TAKEOVER.
ishy wrote:
What? That’s just great.
ishy wrote:
We talked in sunday school this week about how inerrancy really makes no sense at all.
@ mot:
this is an interesting link on the take-over and if you scroll down a bit, it provides a time-line of events
http://sbctakeover.com/TakeoverBook.pdf
I found myself in a discussion the other day, the writer had written a piece on Gender Roles – he originally titled it: “Gender Roles and Perichoresis: the Dance of the Trinity” – so I asked him how single men and women were to fulfill their gender role. Eventually he added “In marriage” to the title of the post, after having explained that Gender roles don’t apply to the unmarried. My point was: “If you call them gender roles, then it’s about gender, not status. If it’s about status, call them marital roles – what have you. So long as it’s focus is on gender, then to the extent that men are men even when they’re single and women are women even when they’re single, this teaching treats them as non-persons until such time as they’re married.”
Just like the Sam Storms piece – these guys view it as a given, it goes unsaid that it’s all about husbands and wives because their gender roles / status roles are one and the same to them. Men as a gender have leadership, husbands in a marriage relationship are therefore the leaders because they are men. Women as a gender are not leaders, wives in a relationship are to submit because they’re women.
Jamie Carter wrote:
Geesh. Talk about entitlement mentality. It runs pretty deep in the evangelical church.
ishy wrote:
I agree!
Steve Scott wrote:
LOL! True!
ishy wrote:
Agreed. I truly believe that most leaders of the Conservative Resurgence were blind-sided when the situation merged into a Calvinist Resurgence. I don’t think they fully appreciated the passion of certain CR leaders (e.g., Al Mohler) to push the pendulum back 500 years to retrieve John Calvin. The BFM2000 revision trends toward Calvinism, making it easier for the New Calvinists to align with SBC (Mohler was on the revision team). Mohler’s strategy was brilliant in this regard, particularly the seminary recruitment of young reformers to accomplish what SBC’s “old” Calvinists could not over the years … Calvinization of the SBC. And the masses in the pew still don’t have a clue.
I was thinking that it probably helped them that they used the names: “Reformed Theology” “Doctrines of Grace” rather than “Calvinism” in a great many of their writings. They’ve disguised it in order to sneak it in.
Christiane wrote:
A great source for info is founders.org. “Founders” is the organization behind the takeover. Their own documentation is very clear. They don’t even try to hide it.
@ Ken F:
Thanks, KEN, I’ll check it out.
I’ve also been researching Mohler’s comments on moral conscience and how his thinking aligns with ‘male headship’. I’m getting it so far that he opts for letting ‘the clear teaching’ of the Word trump moral conscience….. so that would open the flood gates for man-made interpretations of Scriptures by ‘leadership’ to overrule a person’s private moral conscience, if the person disagreed with ‘the leadership’. I’m trying to sort out the Holy Spirit’s role in any of this thinking by Mohler, but I’m not there yet. Thanks again, you are a fountain of resources for us here at TWW. 🙂
Lea wrote:
While I was at Liberty, Patterson came and spoke a few times, and they didn’t hide their partnership. Falwell had a lot of both religious and secular clout that he used to help the Resurgence, even though Thomas Road was independent. And Patterson knew that if he could get Falwell and Thomas Road into the SBC, that a lot of the fundamentalist independent churches would follow–more power to the conservatives.
Patriciamc wrote:
I always heard it ‘at the liquor store’ 🙂
Jamie Carter wrote:
Right. I mean, Baptists are ‘reformed’ too, if you are thinking of the reformation…So I can see why that might be sneaky.
ishy wrote:
Cause that’s what the Baptists really needed, all the super fundy types to join! gosh, no wonder this thing has gone off the rails.
ishy wrote:
I discovered a few years ago that the SBC pastor who baptized me went on to become Executive Director of the CBF. Since I left the SBC in the late 1980s, I had no idea of the changes taking place in the denom. I can’t shake the observation that it now more closely resembles the cult I was a part of for over two decades. It has embraced Patriarchy, and is dipping its toe into the Shepherding cesspool.
Lea wrote:
I don’t think it worked for them like they thought in the long run. I think a lot of those churches converted over to the patriarchy movement and supported the Calvinistas. The Calvinistas made complementarianism a theology equal to the gospel. My experience with the fundamentalists at Liberty is that they were heavily machoistic and the Calvinistas offered them a collective power that being independent didn’t. This is just my guess, and not supported by anything in writing except knowing some of the dynasties from Liberty and I know that they are now Calvinista.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
I really like the CBF theology, but I find the churches I’ve been to are very…. boring? Boring in the sense that I feel like they are going through the motions of doing church the “traditional Baptist way”. Even they look bored. I’m sure there are more modern CBF congregations, but every CBF church I’ve been to is really old-style Baptist.
@ Patriciamc:
Ha, I guess He said it through Paul. But you have to admit Jesus was pretty counter to His culture when it came to women. He treated them shockingly well by the standards of the day.
ishy wrote:
I’ll probably never try one, but I’m at a point in my life where I prefer boring to Big Brother.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
I definitely would, too, but I’ve been going back to the Lutheran churches of my childhood because at least they find meaning in the rituals. The people in the CBF churches I’ve visited don’t even seem to want to do the things the old way, but maybe changing represents becoming more like the conservatives (which I don’t really get, but that’s my guess as to why).
I’ve actually considered planting a church because I still am pretty Baptist in my theology, but there’s no churches near me that feel like home and have similar beliefs.
ishy wrote:
Inerrancy and litera Bible interpretations has been focused almost solely on the roles of women. …… as in what women are not allowed to do and and hierarchy in church, marriage, and sometimes even in society and government.
Inerrancy……. in th KJV??? Descriptions of Solomon building the Temple in Chr. says that the temple was 30 cubits (45 ft.) high and the porch was 120 cubits (180 ft.) high. Was the porch on Solomom’s temple really 4 times the height of the actual temple?
I have asked and listened to college educated church deacons say they can’t explain it. …. doesn’t make sense to them, but it says so in the Bible, so it must be true.
Nancy2 wrote:
Priorities!
Someone the other day was talking about how we subconsciously ‘interpret’ literally everything we hear and he used the example of referencing a ‘sidewalk’ verses a ‘parkway’. Even in English, we have to interpret through context he said!
ishy wrote:
This is why I find the idea of liturgical churches appealing, though I’ve never attended one. The rituals. It may be considered a “dead faith” by my former cult, but maybe there’s less chance for a personality cult?
Nancy2 wrote:
I think they are similar to the Calvinistas in that it’s really all about power. Inerrantists also use the “we’re more biblical than you” line to support the idea that they are closer to God than everyone else. Subjecting women was just one way to amass that power, and it’s really attractive to power-hungry men.
My experience with the fundamental Baptists is that despite the fact that they have independent churches, they all really wanted to be famous. I had a theology teacher who even said that good Christians could only come from “well-known Christian families”. I think that’s a reason they are so into politics.
The motivation is the same, but the methodology is different. And neither of them are what Jesus preached.
“There is persistent pressure to open up and divulge your deepest secrets in these groups.”
This is something I need to warn each of our kids about as they get ready to go to college, or whatever. If they ever find themselves in any group where this is being done, think of something that sounds acceptable, or funny, or find a way to discreetly leave. Open refusal would just invite badgering, or worse, though that shouldn’t stop them if it’s the only way to avoid doing so. You don’t open up to that degree to anyone who hasn’t proven themselves over a long period of time. This might appeal to naive extroverts, but the wisdom books of the Bible have things to say that should make Christians think twice about stuff like this.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
I haven’t found that faith is dead at all in these churches, but just that I don’t entirely agree with sacraments. I’d like to attend a more traditional Episcopal church at least once. I attended a modern one with friends, and liked it, but it’s far away from where I live.
The lack of personality cult is huge, since pastors are assigned and the processes to become one fairly rigorous. Most of the churches are much smaller, too, so I think those wanting to become megachurch pastors don’t bother with mainline churches, or they leave to start one.
NJ wrote:
This is not a Christian practice. Even ‘confession’ in the Catholic sense is held privately and is confidential.
ishy wrote:
And men are obviously closer to God than women. Woman was created, not to serve God, but to serve man.
Inerrancy? I wish Ken Ham would build a replica of the temple as described in 2 Chr. I would go to see that!
ishy wrote:
I hope I didn’t read like I thought it was “dead faith.” I don’t think that. Some charismatic, spiritual gifting type churches do think like that, though.
I’m relieved that personality cults aren’t so prevalent.
Patchthebun wrote:
So it isn’t stock? That is surprising. They must be affiliated with Vintage Church, then. What kind of message does that image convey to potential church members, I wonder.
Nancy2 wrote:
Don’t encourage him. 🙂
ishy wrote:
Interesting point.
I forget which pastor it was I saw responding to the dish rag statement in some comment thread, but he insisted they were really nice dish towels, with other little gifts like candles wrapped inside each one. For fathers’ day, the men got…tools? Nope, they got a chance to have their pictures taken with their kids somewhere in the church building. He said it was the ladies on some committee who thought of the dish towel idea.
Now, it think it is possible for a church to mean well with that type of gift idea for mothers’ day. Far more troubling to me is the allegation that:
“John Bryson often preaches about the role of women and mothers that lead to men being persecuted, weakened and turned into women. He has taught classes for men in the church and at Downline Ministries on how to stand up to women, their mothers and their wives.”
If this is all true, there is a serious problem at that church. That sounds like something I would expect to hear from a refugee from one of the Clearnote “churches”.
I’m confused. Can’t we have respect for men and respect for women? It’s like there is this constant pool of being demeaned that has to be spread around to some people so we might as well dump it on the women.
All the talk about marriage roles is pretty arrogant, considering every marriage is as unique as the two people in it. I think it’s all about breaking down boundaries. If the church leadership can dictate the roles of a husband and wife it can dictate anything.
ishy wrote:
This is what Patterson and Pressler leveraged – he who controls the appointments controls the convention.
And the battle rages on… read a blog article this weekend where one (presumably) SBCer was pointing at another, saying “he doesn’t believe the Bible the right way”. What was more disturbing than the content of the blog, however, was the tone. Very caustic and critical attacks.
Patriciamc wrote:
Oh, you can mention her, all right. They have their explanation all ready. I remember discussing Deborah with a pair of completely indoctrinated submissionists. *They* were sure of their story. I didn’t get it. They had to explain it half a dozen times, and I still didn’t get it. I still don’t.
The meanings of words are important, and I was using the word “curse” incorrectly. Deborah being in charge had something to do with God cursing Israel. Only God didn’t curse Israel, and Deborah wasn’t a curse on Israel, but her leadership was a curse in some way or other, because the men refused to step up and be manly.,
Or something like that. I kept telling them what I thought I heard them saying and how I thought they were using the word “curse”, and they’d say, “No! That’s not what we said!” and explain it over again.
Finally I got tired of listening and trying to understand.
IOW, they’ve got their explanation, but I can’t reproduce it.
“her primary ministry of helping her husband” – Storms wouldn’t be able to find a verse to back that up. He can find verses to extrapolate from, but only by sifting them through his own cultural view.
siteseer wrote:
Redemption groups. Been there. In my experience, they are another tool to exert more control over members.
@ refugee:
p.s. another explanation I’ve heard is that Deborah wasn’t really in authority over Barak… She “supported” him in his God-given role, until he was able to stand up to the task. Just like a godly wife might prop up her faltering husband. While he’s in charge the whole time, of course.
NJ wrote:
I hesitate to nitpick this one, because I can totally see that happening.
It seems like the overall attitude of the church, though, was what made that so offensive. It probably just felt like a piling on…
Robert wrote:
The biblical answer is “No.” Ephesians 5 makes it clear that a husband is to love his wife, protect her, and provide for her …….. while a wife is to respect her husband and submit to him “in all things”. Absolutely nothing is said about a husband respecting his wife or submitting to her in anything for any reason ……. or a wife loving her husband, or protecting him, or providing for him.
So it is written! So shall it be done!
I wrote this in a bit of a sarcastic tone, but there is nothing sarcastic about it in the opinions of millions of “Christian” evangelical men. It is the “Gospel”!
@ Nancy2:
But Delilah is the perfect example of how evil *all* women are, just like Eve is the perfect example of how gullible, weak, and easily deceived *all* women are. She should have protected Samson, just like modern submissionist women are supposed to protect men, by covering herself properly, subsuming all of her own thoughts and desires, and supporting Samson’s vision, and not talking to men who weren’t her husband.
(Seriously, in some of the super-patriarchal circles I’ve experienced, the men seem to have strict rules for how and when they deign to talk to women.)
Nancy2 wrote:
Except that pesky ‘submit to each other’ bit which doesn’t mean what it actually says. Because reasons.
But people like Gruden also add to that little submit thing, that one has to submit ‘intelligently and joyfully’ which even paul didn’t say.
refugee wrote:
And Esther is at fault for having been literally taken at swordpoint to be stuffed into a harem. That makes her ‘compromised’.
@ refugee:
@ refugee:
Okay. Could some of those male supremists explain Jael?
Was her primary ministry to help Sisera meet his full potential?
I say, “Yes!” ; ^ )
Steve Scott wrote:
You just reminded me of really funny comedienne, and her routine about rafting on the Colorado River.
Jeanne Robertson “Don’t go rafting without a Baptist in the boat!”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeUdZ2VkG30
Nancy2 wrote:
I actually read a ‘bible gateway’ commentary about how Jael was obviously a bad person.
Jael did not kill Sisera as David did Goliath, a champion of the Lord bent on destroying His arch-enemies. While divine judgment fell upon Sisera, Jael erred in that she did not allow God to designate the means of punishment. Perhaps she felt an irresistible impulse to slay the persistent enemy of God’s people, but she remains forever censurable for the cruel way she killed Sisera, even though Deborah gloated over the act and praised it in poetic form. When Deborah said, “Blessed above women shall be Jael,” perhaps she was only praising her faith and not her treachery. Any woman killing the country’s enemy must be the friend of Israel, and so the method of Sisera’s death mattered little to Deborah who doubtless thought that all was fair in time of war. What atrocious crimes have been committed in the name of patriotism!
refugee wrote:
There’s an old joke about needing to invite two Baptists fishing, otherwise they’ll drink all your beer.
I have a comment on Jael but it’s in limbo. Basically, bible gateway calls her a terrible person, even though she’s praised in the bible. INERRANCY!
Lea wrote:
🙂 Yeah, the Bible is inerrant except when it doesn’t fit some chosen agenda. My former cult used to serve wine at communion. Then someone decided that the Bible didn’t really mean wine when it clearly says wine. Or that the wine of Biblical times wasn’t what we think of as wine today. Because Noah didn’t really get drunk from the fruit of the vine and sleep with his daughters. Mental gymnastics.
My prayer request posted on the other thread yesterday.
Muff Potter, Patriciamc, and Christiane responded and said they would pray. If anyone else would kindly pray, I would appreciate it. There are two more gentleman, besides the blind lady who is homeless and used to go to the mega church that I attended for awhile with a friend, who also need housing/medical care etc. One man has a bad leg and health problems. Another man is elderly and in a wheelchair.
********************
Off-topic prayer request.
I am extremely worried about a homeless woman who is blind and has a service dog.
I realized that when I went to a mega church, at the invitation from a friend, that
this woman was in the choir and in a job support group that I attended briefly between jobs.
I emailed the mega church and asked for their help in finding her a place to live through social services, care for herself, caregivers, veterinary care for her dog (and a bath).
The woman once lived in an apartment near me. But she was laid off from her computer job.
Thanks friends. The mega church does have social workers and therapists on staff, people connected to the community who know services available.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
That should be Lot. My fingers are moving faster than my brain this morning.
An authentic man would not quibble over the details and minutiae of what constitutes an “authentic man”. If what constitutes a man is so important, why do we not see chapter after chapter, nay, entire books in the Bible dedicated to what makes a man?
If this is not a central theme in the Bible, why is this such a predominant theme with these people–pretty much THE theme? It is because they are not authentic men, they are scared little boys desperately trying to compensate for their deep-seated feelings of inadequacy. That wouldn’t bother me so much, they’d be objects of pity if it were not for the fact that to compensate for their inadequacies they’d warped theology, destroyed churches, silenced and abused women in the process. That’s why I oppose them, because I sincerely believe the Lord opposes them, as He opposes all who are haughty, arrogant, proud.
Nancy2 wrote:
I’ll explain Jael. She’s the official patron saint/hero to our campers for the 2017 Camp Backbone to be held in Kentucky in our part of the state. In the meantime, we’ll be stockpiling patriarchy books from garage sales for the big sharp shooting contest where you’ll teach us how to blow those books to bits.
I put her A-Dora-ble portrait on my blog.
https://gbfsvchurchabuse.org/2016/09/03/cartoon-a-precious-moment-for-jael-by-rachel-stones-father/
^goof: should read — “your part of the state” (look at me and my California manners, Nancy2, already makin’ myself at home)
@ BeenThereDoneThat:
Well, Noah got drunk as well. He just passed out nude in his tent.
Law Prof wrote:
I recall an important part of the Bible where Jesus said that all of The Law and The Prophets could be summed up as Love God and Love Your Neighbor as Yourself.
Jesus never ratified Comp teachings.
Nancy2 wrote:
That proves it! Solomon must have been a “Southern” Baptist – Southerners like big porches!
NJ wrote:
The modern “Christian” church has become indistinguishable from Scientology!
I went to one of the Men’s Fraternity/Authentic Manhood meetings encouraged by Fellowship Memphis. Couldn’t stand it & had to leave early. The room of virtual strangers trying to over-share manufactured slights to their collective psyches was an emotional black hole! It was literally draining my will to live.
Over-sharing with strangers in order to get cheap validation is hardly “authentic.”
Between this nonsense, the collective misogyny, irresponsible & un-Biblical threats of church discipline, hiring and passing along sexual perverts and predators, I can only come to the conclusion that pastors Loritts & Bryson (as well as Hamp Holcomb and the rest of the elders) are trying to work out their own bad psychologies as a strange power-trip on an all-too-willing and trusting congregation.
People need to flee from these perverted kooks!
Max wrote:
Ha, ha, ha ,ha! So true! I have a big front porch ……. and a back deck ….. Lots of shade trees.
Betcha the temple didn’t have any shade trees around it!
Nancy2 wrote:
Yes, to follow their prescribed path for the function of men and women and the church one has to take a few verses which were written to a patriarchal culture in which women were considered property and due to cultural constraints had virtually no legitimate means of supporting themselves without male support, short of being a common prostitute, apply them utterly without regard to the cultural context of the day or particular situations they were written to address, while simultaneously jettisoning everything else in the Bible said about women, mutual submission, mutual ownership of bodies within the marriage, there being neither male nor female in Christ–and speaking of Jesus, one would have to completely toss every single circumstance of His behavior towards women (e.g, invariably treating women with genuine respect rather than patronizing condescension, shockingly appearing first to women, not men, obeying His mother when, despite His protests, He nonetheless gave in to her desire that He should take care of the wine shortage at Cana).
But of course, what of it? Is throwing out what Jesus did anything new for them?
Law Prof wrote:
Including Mary Magdalene, the first apostle!
FW Rez wrote:
“I DENOUNCE HEBERT!” (chop chop chop)
“I DENOUNCE DANTON!” (chop chop chop)
“I DENOUNCE ROBESPIERRE!” (chop chop chop)
Jamie Carter wrote:
If you can control the words, you can control the people who hear and believe the words.
Consider the following exchange between Humpty Dumpty and Alice in “Through the Looking Glass” (Lewis Carroll):
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”
Nancy2 wrote:
The early Christians did not see sacramental marriage in the same way as the neo-Cals interpretation of Ephesians 5, no. This letter from Tertullian to his wife shows a much DIFFERENT perspective:
From a letter by Tertullian, an Early Church Father, to his wife, ca. 202 AD:
“How beautiful, then, the marriage of two Christians, two who are one in hope, one in desire, one in the way of life they follow, one in the religion they practice.
They are as brother and sister, both servants of the same Master. Nothing divides them, either in flesh or in Spirit. They are in very truth, two in one flesh; and where there is but one flesh there is also but one spirit.
They pray together, they worship together, they fast together; instructing one another, encouraging one another, strengthening one another.
Side by side they face difficulties and persecution, share their consolations. They have no secrets from one another, they never shun each other’s company; they never bring sorrow to each other’s hearts… Psalms and hymns they sing to one another.
Hearing and seeing this, Christ rejoices. To such as these He gives His peace. Where there are two together, there also He is present, and where He is, there evil is not.”
Velour wrote:
Will this be on a full-auto range?
Max wrote:
“Whoever controls the Past controls the Future. Whoever controls the Present controls the Past.”
“Where does the Past exist?”
“In historical records and the memories of men.”
“And We, The Party control All history; We, The Party, control men’s minds and memories; so We, The Party control the Past and We, The Party, Control the Future. LONG LIVE BIG BROTHER!”
— Comrade O’Brian, Inner Party, 1984
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
I am VERY familiar with the concept.
Nancy2 wrote:
Ahh, yes. Southern life at its best! Rocking on big porches and church dinners on the ground. Southern Baptists are the only Christians I know who believe they are supposed to take a covered dish to heaven when they die! If you clapped in church last Sunday, you probably feel guilty about it today. SBC life is so strange – I should know, I’ve endured it for 60+ years!
Lea wrote:
Joyful as North Korean Population Units dancing Joyfully with Great Enthusiasm before Comrade Dear Leader?
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Probably. And I’m guessing the ‘intelligently’ part falls in when you know for certain that the decisions your husband is making are extra stupid but you let him make them anyway.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Nancy2 will have to fill you in on those details of that event (or to use Nick’s term “in sport”) at Camp Backbone 2017.
Law Prof wrote:
Standing ovation, gentlemen!
I just read that headline as “Daesh Towels” instead of “Dish Towels”.
(Daesh is a derogatory name for ISIS/ISIL.)
Freudian Slip or Holy Spirit?
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
A good rule of thumb (or fingers) in early morning is to avoid commenting on any blog that does not have a DELETE mechanism before finishing your third cup of coffee.
(I never actually follow my own advice, but it sure would keep me out of a boatload of trouble if I did.)
Lea wrote:
Oh, he was apologizing if anyone in the church had taken offense at what was meant to be an honoring gesture to the mothers of the congregation. If that other stuff I highlighted is true though, I can see how the dish towel thing would be interpreted the way it was by the original female commenter.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
LOL… Nah, ISIS would be handing out bombs to be strapped on to their chests.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
ROFL!
NJ wrote:
What struck about one of those articles is that he sounded very clinical and unemotional when talking about people being hurt by Rick Trotter, but he got all kinds of fired up when somebody criticized the church mothers day gifts! Which one of those things matters most??
I was raised Assembly of God, then became Baptist after I married. When I was a young teen, we sang a song at camp and in youth services that said this “I am a C, I am a CH, I am a
C H R I S T I A N.” It didn’t say I am a m a l e, or I’m a f e m a l e. The song said that we are all Christians. That’s where I make my stand. In Christ there is no male or female. In my family of strong women (and men), if any man would dare to try this comp stuff of saying I am man, heed my words. I am the head of the household and thus I am the King, etc. etc. I am sure that such a female family member would chew the man up and spit them out. In fact, I have seen it done. We are Christians, and that’s it. i am working on something (in my head now) that I will post sometime later about sort of this same thing.
NJ wrote:
Personally, I think a gift card for a pedicure would be more honoring. 🙂 Or even just a single red rose. Maybe that’s because I came from a cult that believes irons and vacuum cleaners are appropriate gifts for women for Christmas and birthdays. A dish towel, no matter how pretty, symbolizes a “woman’s place.”
@ BeenThereDoneThat:
Absolutely agree. May as well have been a doormat. The message is the same – wives and mothers are to SERVE.
Max wrote:
I’m pretty sure it’s in the Methodist by-laws.
Jamie Carter wrote:
They make the Woman be a type for wives or a type for females as it suits their purpose. Paul uses her as a type for all deceived people in 2 Corinthians, but you will *never* hear a Female Subordinationist mention that inconvenient textual fact. That is one reason for the confusion. The other main reason for confusion is that there is no textual basis for Male Authority as prescriptive or as essential to “God’s good and beautiful design.” In other words, they make it up as they go. And that is not what textual conservatives should do. However, that is exactly what an ideologue would do.
Velour wrote:
That cartoon really appeals to my bizarre sense of humor. We mist have a tee shirt of this as part of our camp uniform
@ Patriciamc:
Mist? Must!
Nancy2 wrote:
Well, she was “clearly” TM stepping out of her gender role and compromising Sisera’s masculinity.
First let me say I hang out here nearly everyday even if there is no new post.
I know I will be showing too much testosterone for this site (even though my doctor says I need more) and I know I be will personally shot by many of you here.
I am a relatively new member of FBC Little Rock (1 year). I have gone through marriage and membership classes and probably have only missed two sermons. And I personally have a couple years of formal bible training.
I am no Calvinist. There are plenty here that that are not and could probably say that 98% of the folks don’t even know what the tulip is.
I can truly say FBCLR is no ACTS29 or 9Marks teaching complex of the New Calvinist Reform, Young-Restless & Reformed, Clavanista hide out or what ever description you want to put here. Are there “some” here… trust me they are everywhere.
I have had numerous discussions with pastors and some lead elders and I know that this is not the case. I have not sugar coated any of my questions when it comes to this subject and I feel very confident of that fact. Especially when it comes to ACTS29 and 9Marks.
Is there some associations that I have questions about sure but I also know their stance on a lot of the subjects.
In their marriage class. I NEVER felt the leaning towards “Soap Bubble” mentality… Didn’t even come close. Did they talk about roles…yes.
I realize defending someone here stupid, but as a family that is right in the middle of it I can say that some things described here or the way they are colored is not correct.
Flame on for I was dumb for doing this.
A.Stacey wrote:
There are still a lot of non-Calvinist SBC churches out there, and the majority of Southern Baptists are not Calvinist. The problem is that the ENTIRE leadership of the SBC is now Calvinist, and was overturned by force. Most of the new seminary grads are Calvinist due to Mohler’s reorganization of the seminaries and his aggressive recruitment of young Calvinists. Churches are calling pastors who turn around and bring in a bunch of their friends to vote the church into an authoritarian model against the will of the congregation.
I just looked at your church’s website, and they clearly have women in leadership. This is not acceptable at all to the Calvinistas. Because of the control the Calvinistas have over the SBC resolutions, your church could be thrown out of the SBC as early as next year if they refuse to “demote” those female staffers.
This all is pretty serious, and I believe Southern Baptist churches who think they are not Calvinist, and therefore “safe”, are probably in trouble.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
Me too!
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
I’d be okay with the dish towel and air freshener for Mother’s Day, as long as the gave the men a dust rag and a can of Behold furniture polish for Father’s Day!!!! Bwaaahahahahahah!
A.Stacey wrote:
I am curious how heavily they laid it on. What was your impression?
(used to go to F-North at one point, btw, but its been a long long time. I understand a lot of this oddball stuff only came along in the last 15-20 years)
@ ishy:
Thanks for your summary of the history of Southern Baptists and the take-over by Calvinists.
It is very dire and dangerous. While A. Stacey’s church may be “safe” for now, in the future don’t be on it. If they still have typical Baptist polity (congregational votes), expect that to be changed to an authoritarian structure with elder-rule, and I do mean “rule”. And expect membership covenants.
I think it’s difficult to make men look weaker than by teaching classes to teach men to “stand up to women, their mothers, and their wives”. What about standing up to their daughters?
Nancy2 wrote:
Ya know, I’m thinking that deserves a t-shirt for Pound Sand Ministries (TM), Camp Backbone!
Patriciamc wrote:
Jael didn’t just compromise Sisera’s masculinity, she knocked it out of the park and scored one for God.
Now THAT’s a female role model for the ages.
A.Stacey wrote:
Welcome to commenting, A. Stacey.
I’m glad you stated your thoughts on the matter. I have found people to be a thoughtful crowd here, with a wide range of views. And even if we have misunderstandings — it seems to happen every now and again — we straighten it out, shake hands, and move on.
Our gracious blog queens – Dee and Deb (“The Deebs”) — exhibit a high degree of ethics and transparency, including correcting the record, being open to ideas, and even apologizing when they have made an error (I have yet to see most clergy apologize when they’ve messed up). They welcome diverse opinions here, including yours.
No flame wars needed, honestly.
A.Stacey wrote:
I see nothing particularly offensive about the church in Little Rock as you describe it, though I dare say there seemed little seriously amiss in the last two churches at which we were members and at which I was an elder–until we started taking a serious stand against abuse we uncovered, at that point, the masks fell and we discovered that not only was there little seriously amiss, but that virtually everything was fatally amiss. But it may well be that your fellowship is generally healthy and a relatively safe place;; I have no grounds to automatically assume everyone’s experience will be the same as mine.
The biggest problem IMHO is your attitude; you assume the worst, essentially treating us like unreasoning fools who flame anyone who has even a mild disagreement or defends any church. That’s particularly fair or accurate.
Robert wrote:
My ex-pastor could do that with his daughters. I watched him. I was at his home on church business. He needed something from another part of the home. He told one of his college aged daughters to get it for him. She responded — a young woman — with absolute obedience. Eyes down, hurried to get said item, returned with it.
I thought it was disturbing to watch. No love there. No casual, “Hey honey, could you give me a hand and get [name of object] from [whatever part of the house it was at].”
So the patriarchists are used to bossing around their daughters, and their daughters will be doormats to men (and as Daisy has pointed out abusive women too, like in the workplace).
Law Prof wrote:
That was my experience, Law Prof, at my ex-abusive church.
I had to see enough godly people – families, couples, singles – leave our church with no warning, fervent looks in their eyes, uneasiness…to realize that something was wrong.
I refer to bad churches as Spiritual Carbon Monoxide Poisoning. Many people are knocked out before they realize what’s wrong. A few lucky souls feel ‘sick’ and take their immediate leave.
@ Law Prof:
“…NOT particularly fair or accurate” Unfortunate typo.
NJ wrote:
My feeling is that interfering and messing around with a mother’s intuition can only lead to bad results.
Lea wrote:
Lea… I did not feel uncomfortable or felt like we needed to talk about it on the way home. My wife who is well sensitive to this didn’t even bat a lash. Did we agree with everything, no but I think personally as a husband and wife we have a lot of things settled. But neither of us said…”you got to be kidding…” type thing.
Somewhat of an odd thing, we did have two “Quiver Full” folks there. My first meeting with such. I’m not sure but I don’t think they even go there anymore.
Velour wrote:
Perfect way of putting it. I wish more would make a big bang and set up a major confrontation with the ones doing evil so at least reasonable people who actually care something about Jesus at the fellowship can have the opportunity to see the conflict and make a decision. But then again, it took me years to get to the point where I just didn’t care anymore and couldn’t shut my mouth against pastoral abuse.
Law Prof wrote:
Amen.
Law Prof wrote:
Slow down there young man… sorry you took it that way. I love this place, it has shown me a lot. I have way too much respect for it. But I think you mis understood my tone. Again sorry you could not see it. and I think most understood knew from whence I was speaking.
siteseer wrote:
My brother is a pediatrician and he says that failure to listen to a mother about her instincts is a terrible mistake for a doctor to make. Mothers pick up on details with a radar that is above ‘reason’ and no self-respecting pediatrician will completely ignore a mother’s intuition about her child’s health.
A.Stacey wrote:
Hmm. Thanks.
I do think a lot of times you don’t really see the issues until something comes up. I know someone at my new church said they had a lady who left Immanuel (I think) after the pastor preached something against women she didn’t like. I haven’t heard anything about fellowship though. If I went there I might be keeping a weather eye, though…
Nancy2 wrote:
Hahaha! Or at least give them a dish towel as well. It just wouldn’t be right for my husband and I to fight over the one dish towel. He does dishes too. 🙂 And laundry, and vacuuming, and dusting. My grandfather, who was a naval Chief Petty Officer, was in charge of washing dishes and laundry after he retired.
A.Stacey wrote:
No. Not stupid, not dumb. (Maybe courageous? : ))
I hope you are right about FBC Little Rock. Thanks for sharing the first hand info.
I did visit the website, and a must say that the distinctions between the men’s and women’s ministries really rubbed me the wrong way.
The women’s ministry is all pink flowers and lace and artsy craftsy projects.
The men’s ministry is “iron sharpens iron” with camping, hunting, softball, etc.
There’s a very definite dividing line there. Men can’t be artistic and women can’t be athletic?
Why can’t we be both?
A.Stacey–
I agree that so many in the church (Fellowship Bible Church–Little Rock) are unaware of the various icks, asms, and spasms of various theological thoughts. However, these church “leaders” were taught be people who did believe those things (frequently, at Dallas Theological Seminary), and it undeniably colors their teaching. Frequently, the leaders were part of the “swallow & follow” crowd to their teachers/mentors, and now, they expect their followers to be “swallow & follow”, themselves. Some of them are so immersed in it that they can no more explain it than a fish can explain the concept of “water”–they have too-long been breathing it in.
More importantly (& deviating from the underlying philosophy speculations that can–sometimes, intentionally–distract us from the matter at hand), ask your pastor at Fellowship Little Rock, Ben Parkinson, why he knowingly was part of the hiring of a known child molester (Pete Newman) while he was a founding pastor at Fellowship Memphis.
Ask him, too, why he tried to cover up the story of Rick Trotter (the pastor’s brother-in-law and worship pastor at that church who was taking videos of unknowing women & children in the church bathroom and in his home).
While you’re at it, ask him why he knowingly passed along that sexual deviant and predator to be on staff at another church in town.
It is OK and and interesting mental exercise to wonder why, philosophically, these wicked men are covering up such atrocities; however, it is important to note that it is far more difficult to find ANY church of ANY denomination or theological bent that is standing up for victims!
While I think the main motivation is to protect their own reputations (read:Twitter fame) and incomes, I do believe that it is almost undeniable that a devaluing of women plays a part. I would like to think that elder boards comprised of women would not make the same grave & idiotic decisions in such matters. Perhaps, I am too optimistic.
I’m not here necessarily to insult the theology of Fellowship Bible Little Rock–I am here to tell you that they are actively hiring people who are part and parcel to sexual wickedness that endangers the most vulnerable in their flock. I am here to tell you that they look the other way when their church plant “leaders” do nefarious things. I am here to tell you that “good” people don’t do that to other Believers.
They don’t love their supposed sisters in Christ (I would also maintain that they don’t love their supposed brothers, either). They love themselves and they love money; if it were different, you’d see public repentance, instead of the hiring of lawyers, private investigators and PR firms.
Heavy will be the millstone around these guys’ necks!
A.Stacey wrote:
I swear I thought that was just a weird tv/cult thing for a long, long time. But I think more people are going that route than I originally thought.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
The real question is, were these towels monogrammed??? If so, as a good southern girl, I might have to give them a pass.
Nancy2 wrote:
Gateway has a women’s group literally called ‘PINK’!
Velour wrote:
“Cinnamon Rolls, not Gender Rolls”, with the Jael cartoon sketch beneath the phrase!
“I’m thankful for the way the Leaders Collective allows me to learn from men in other networks doing the same gospel mission.” (Ian McConnell, Sovereign Grace Churches)
In New Calvinist ranks, Calvinism = Gospel. Thus, McConnell is saying that LC has linked men on the same mission to spread reformed theology. As Dee has pointed out, LC members share a common DNA. They apparently have a genetic code which drives them to seek others of like-mind to ensure growth, development, functioning, and reproduction of their tribe. Their genealogy must trace back to John Calvin, since these poor souls appear to be driven by genetic instructions first spawned by Calvin to restore the gospel (his gospel) that the rest of Christendom has lost. The reformed movement is an assemblage of some strange characters on a common mission … another gospel, which is not ‘the’ Gospel.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
No. We will be roughing it, and stressing safety of the participants at Camp Backbone at the same time.
Law Prof wrote:
Sadly, this mirrors my experience, as well.
A.Stacey wrote:
Well it sounded like you felt you were treading among vicious, sleeping dogs, hoping not to stir one to wrath. But such it is with the net, we don’t get the tone of voice, the facial expressions, often don’t get much of the context and off we go thinking things that are not so. So my bad. And thanks for calling my nosing-over-the-edge 50-something self “young”, kind of like being carded.
A.Stacey wrote:
Law Prof was perfectly fair in his response to you and I agreed with it.
Your point was fine about your experience at that church. Your closing remarks weren’t needed. And kinda flame-ish.
Nancy2 wrote:
There’s an idea.
My C.R., not G.R. t-shirt is nicely washed and waiting for the end of the week to wear. I lay out my clothes to wear the night before. I thought about wearing it today but then nixed the idea.
A.Stacey wrote:
well, for some time I have suspected that the men who needed ‘male-headship’ to shore up their masculinity were in fact, suffering from a LACK of male hormones and were trying to hide their weakness by role-playing as the ‘dominant’ sex.
All this ‘male headship’ stuff is compensating for some terrible dificiencies in the men who embrace it. The only thing I think they have too much of is PRIDE (the sin).
Christiane wrote:
My daughter developed kidney stones at age 16. The army doctor that saw her at Ft. Campbell told me there was nothing wrong – “she’s just a hypochondriac.” She (the doctor) drugged my daughter with Demerol to “calm her down”.
I intended to remove my daughter from the exam room. The doctor ordered the attending nurse to help “restrain” me. I know my daughter. She’s tough! I went ballistic – went to the front desk in a rage and demanded my daughter’s medical files and an MP to help me take my daughter out of that room. A nurse and an orderly removed the doctor from the exam room, and another doctor sent my daughter to radiology for x-rays. The doctor was transferred to another base – the whole 3rd floor heard the argument between me and the doctor.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
I’ll go with your choice if those are the only alternatives, at least I can sleep through a boring service. In the past if I found something boring I usually stayed silent, being well familiar with the unspoken rules, yet a few times I challenged it anyway. Why does it have to be boring? I was given the usual silencing response, I was “not spiritual enough”, that “it wasn’t about me”. I’m the opposite of ADD but I never figured out how monotony was supposed to bring me closer to God. Is this some variation on wearing a hair shirt, we should obtain holiness through divine boredom?
Christiane wrote:
I don’t think you are too far off there…
To everyone… I take your criticism with no problem. I completely understand. Like I said I love this place.
First let me say. When FBCLR planting arm of the church plants a church. It comes COMPLETELY independent, on it’s own, stand alone entity in all ways including leadership.
Secondly, what ever PINK you saw at FBCLR website has nothing to do with anything with Gateway’s PINK. Just look at the price to go, that should tell you enough there.
Law Prof wrote:
And that’s why I hate texting!
A.Stacey wrote:
I didn’t mean to conflate the two, sorry for the confusion. I just think there ministry being actually NAMED pink is goofy. That was just a gateway comment from me 🙂
Bill M wrote:
Hmmm. I guess they don’t have to be either/or. Maybe you can find a truly interesting service in a non-authoritarian church. If someone nodded off during the sermon in my former cult they got called out from the pulpit. I left some services with bruised inner arms from pinching myself to stay awake. Boring is fine with me as long as the minister lets me get my beauty rest.
Christiane wrote:
Like Douggie ESQUIRE cosplaying General Patton and Highborn Noblemen (as well as clinging to his faux-noble title “ESQUIRE”)?
siteseer wrote:
Cult 101: Eliminate healthy boundaries
Lea wrote:
I think we can tell which matters most to him…
@ Bill M:
Good question!!
Nancy2 wrote:
You did the right thing.
Reminds me of the time my daughter, then five, picked up the neighbor’s Persian cat. Within the hour, she was rashing up, her eyes got red and swollen and her breathing became distressed . . . out we went to the Naval Hospital and the personnel at the desk tried to dismiss my daughter’s breathing problem as ‘minor’, whereupon I went ‘berserk’ and ….. well they took my daughter in immediately and gave her oxygen and adrenalin and the doctor yelled at the desk personnel that breathing problems in a small child are ’emergencies’. It took me hours to calm down. I STILL get mad just thinking about how that hospital had untrained desk staff trying to screen out emergencies …. nowadays, at least they have nurses doing triage in the ER
Law Prof wrote:
So true – They come across as posers…and try re-define what an “authentic man” and even leaders are.
What strikes me frequently (and especially the Sam Storm post) is actually their view of men is really pathetic. From the post….
“This may involve several things, such as making the home a safe place, free from the sinful influence of the world, providing affirmation and encouragement; building loyalty to him in the children …. showing confidence in his decisions”
An “authentic man” does the right thing – because it is right and doesn’t need affirmation. Nobody else can “build” loyalty – loyalty and respect have to be earned by the individual…….showing confidence in decisions? Try making good decisions!
We all have seen good leaders…..the best leaders I have seen did not need to coerce or cajole others to follow – nor did they require others to submit. They treated everybody with dignity and respect, leading by example and never demanding respect but their actions certainly commanded respect – people are drawn to that type of leadership, willingly.
There seems to be so much focus on the role of “the leader” that I think really gets lost is leading what to where?
The best leaders I have encountered never pretend they have all of the answers and will look to others who may have more knowledge or experience (wisdom) in an area to arrive at the best solution for the whole. It is this ability to be humble enough to use all available resources, which also provides others “skin in the game”
On the other hand, much of what I see in this movement is small-minded, petty and tyrannical – but then again – I think that is how they portray God, so it shouldn’t surprise
Nancy2 wrote:
What a great and patriarchal idea! It’s downright Biblical! … “And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes.” –Genesis 18:27
Mike wrote:
Isn’t that the truth. They tell these men to ‘lead’ their wives, but they don’t even know what true leadership is. Leaders listen when someone is talking sense! And when someone knows more than they do. Instead, they want women to sit down and let their supposed husband ‘leaders’ make dumb decision after dumb decision, without input and with nothing but praise for it. They specifically talk about how men should be leaders regardless of actual talent.
Mike wrote:
In a Complementarian marriage, “leader” usually has the unspoken definition: he who gets his own way all of the time.
Friend wrote:
Just my modern day application of OT scripture!
Mike wrote:
The YRR pastors in my area all have a common title … “Lead Pastor”, even if they are the only pastor on staff! I wonder which New Calvinist icon first came up the term, since they all seem to prefer this particular designation. Perhaps it’s just a title which sends a message to others: “I am reformed” … I haven’t seen it used outside the New Calvinist movement. Most likely, they want to convey to church members that they are in charge and command of their outfit, and that they have a position of advantage over all others. Everywhere else in Christendom, simple ole “Pastor” seems to work just fine.
ishy wrote:
It’s not clear in context whether you are describing an Episcopal parish (belonging to the Episcopal Church, also called ECUSA). My understanding is that Episcopal priests (rectors, et al.) are called by the parish, not assigned, although I believe the diocesan bishop has to approve the decision made by the parish search committee.
Episcopal deacons (usually recent seminary graduates) are assigned, by the bishop, during the span of time between their ordination to the diaconate and their ordination to the priesthood. This is usually a period of some months.
I’m not an expert about this, but believe it covers most of Episcopal clergy who serve in churches.
More important: you’re right, in a lot of mainline churches, there’s plenty of living faith and a blissful absence of cult of personality!
OT, ish, some more weird genesis interpretation from Bruce Ware in talking to Demoss and trying to explain how the curse in genesis about a man ruling is actually that ” It’s desire for you means sin wants to make you do what it wants you to do, and in response to that you’re going to have to exert your authority.” So I guess men have to be creepy control freaks, because otherwise women won’t sit down and do what they’re told, as was gods great and beautiful from the beginning because that makes sense:
https://www.reviveourhearts.com/radio/revive-our-hearts/everyone-submits-to-someone/
Nancy2 wrote:
I noticed that bit of stereotyping as well. My family loved camping and sports was never looked at as a primarily male interest. After seeing the amazing events and medals awarded to both men and women at the Olympics this year, I think it’s safe to say both genders love sports!
@ Bill M:
I took it differently. I don’t want to be entertained. And I don’t want a sin sniffing pedantic hour lecture from a 30 year old YRR who thinks his message is the most important event of my week.
Max wrote:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/27/d4/d6/27d4d6f9589f0d260e1a5468e3e4f166.jpg
Friend wrote:
I was mostly speaking in general about mainline denominations and how many handle pastors/ministers. I grew up Lutheran (LCMS), and spent some time in high school and college in UMC churches. I also went to a PCUSA church for awhile.
The one mainline denomination I haven’t visited was ECUSA. I am sort of fascinated by their high church traditions. The Anglican church I did visit were contemporary in worship style, and not affiliated. I am not sure if they are now, but they had recently split from the ECUSA when I visited there several years ago. They probably weren’t the best example of an Episcopal church.
A.Stacey wrote:
The problem is that there is *no* textual basis for “Roles” of “Leader” and “Submitter” assigned to males and females exclusively on the basis of their sex. None. Zero. The idea of “Roles” was dreamed up to exclude women from the pastorate. George Knight III did that and also brought us ESS. That Bible churches would support and promote something that is *not* in the text is exceedingly odd.
I’m not going to flame you for speaking up, mainly because I have never been able to keep Bible Church of Little Rock and FBC Little Rock straight, so I have no idea even which one we are talking about. 🙂
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
Historically speaking, that’s a pretty authentic thing for men to do! Unfortunately, the Biblical Manhood crowd doesn’t seem to understand that manliness is a social construct that has virtually nothing to do with the Bible.
Friend wrote:
This!
At my ex-church Grace Bible Fellowship we weren’t allowed to have boundaries.
Everything was fair game. If a church member demanded your personal business and you declined, you’d be turned in to the elders, ordered to show up to meetings to ‘explain yourself’. Tacky. Class-less. Maybe they can get a group discount on ‘charm school lessons’!
Nancy2 wrote:
Please oh please come to California and straighten out the pastors/elders at Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley.
Lea wrote:
Ofda, leadership leadership leadership. I am very wary of the term, what does leadership mean? Jesus spoke about being a servant. If you put the two terms on a spectrum, leadership can take you all the way over to totalitarian abuse, if you are instead motivated as servant it is hard to get it so wrong to be anywhere near the controlling authoritarians we so often discuss here.
Our culture seems saturated with the idea we need leadership. If someone tells me they want to be a leader how do I interpret it? I now am very suspicious of the motivation. Do they want to serve and help people or do they want control and authority? Personally I’m done with hierarchical leadership in the church or in marriage, too bad it took me 60 years to figure out.
Friend wrote:
So good to hear.
Lydia wrote:
I don’t want to be entertained but I now understand that when I am only valued for sitting in attendance, that what goes on is otherwise indifferent to whether I am there or not, that what goes on is rote, there is no room for individual spontaneity let alone the Spirit, then I become disinterested. Note it doesn’t mean “ME”, I look for that spark of creativity to come from others and I don’t need to be heard all that often.
Mike wrote:
Funny, that seems to be precisely the sort of leader described in the New Testament, the one who’s least and last, who never demands compulsion with their edicts, but leads by godly example alone, the one who understands that “submit one to another” means precisely that–that they’re supposed to submit to others as co-equals in Christ.
Mike wrote:
Jesus told us where, at least with regard to those who are tyrants, the pharisees who only want to “love you well” by lording it over you: “You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are.”
@ Gram3:
So glad to see you back commenting, Gram3. I missed you on the other threads.
@ Bill M:
Oh I agree with that. I am done with spectator Christianity.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
True. Though, men who became Christians were expected to forgo such vices. Aside from that, did anyone have to teach them how to be “authentic” men? Weren’t they typically striving to become like Jesus? I suspect that this focus on “manliness” is going to come back to bite them.
When men made the Bible the fourth member of the Godhead, they attained a god they can control.
http://wayneharmon.org/2015/02/25/book-worshipers/
Mike wrote:
Exactly!
My dad used to say that if you have to tell people you are the leader, you aren’t.
Christiane wrote:
Saturday Doug Wilson posted a relatively innocuous (for him) article https://dougwils.com/s8-expository/gave-gifts-men.html#disqus_thread
implying that the Giver gives gifts, not just to men only, but to male church officers only. And it’s not a stretch to think he means only in Doug-approved churches. His title “and gave gifts to men” from Eph 4:8 means to me generic men– mankind– and among those gifts are apostles, prophets, etc.
In the article he has a line that struck me in light of how complementationists monkey with the trinity sometimes. I have almost no Internet no I might not respond but am interested if anyone theologically minded has a take. Is it correct to say, “Before Jesus ascended into Heaven, He promised that He would send the Holy Spirit to replace Him. The Spirit’s work is to give gifts to men, and to generate fruit among men.”? Especially the “replace him” part.
Were you there when Mohler fired Diana Garland? I can’t remember when she left there and went to Baylor.@ ishy:
Lydia wrote:
Yep. I’ve always liked that one.
Of course, men are never actually told to ‘lead’ their wives, they are told to love them. But that’s probably splitting hairs.
BJ wrote:
I went to Southeastern, and it was a bit before my time.
If anyone wants to know more, this article is splendid: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/1995/may15/5t6054.html?start=1
Note the opening paragraph: “In his August 1993 presidential convocation address to Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, R. Albert Mohler, Jr., called the institution’s framework “evangelical, Reformed, biblical, and orthodox” and cited historic documents saying professors must subscribe to “the fundamental principles of the gospel” or face removal by the board.”
The ball was definitely rolling way before the 2000 BFM revision!
Uncle Dad wrote:
And for some, a god whom they actually know. They can spend three years in a seminary, learn a little halting Koine Greek, memorize the verses, debate the meanings, teach the applications, know all the “right” things, say all the “right” things, and no more know Jesus than the average attendee at an atheists convention–in fact, those at the atheists convention may be closer to God than those who worship the Bible, because at least the atheists are forthright about what they believe and haven’t for the most part infiltrated the churches and mislead the little ones and stolen people’s joy.
ishy wrote:
Goodness! This is about women too. Why does it always seem to come down to that for these people?
I was reading an article by Aimee on why comp people never seem to mention Phoebe. Some guy sallied forth in the comments to say don’t worry, the ESV only has a few instances where someone is listed as deacon. Like, why are these people so threatened that phoebe is called a deacon? But they can’t translate her that way, because it threatens them. Even though she is clearly a leader in the early church. As were many women.
I keep thinking that if I were a young man who had grown up without a dad, and was largely clueless about “authentic manhood”, I’d prefer to peruse the Art Of Manliness blog over anything coming out of the YRR subculture.
ishy wrote:
Quote from article;
“The battle began in March when Mohler fired Diana Garland as dean of the seminary’s Carver School of Church Social Work, a 10-year-old program and the nation’s only accredited master’s in social work program run by a seminary, after Garland publicly criticized Mohler’s leadership.
In a lengthy statement, Garland faulted Mohler for refusing to hire David Sherwood of Gordon College in Wenham, Massachusetts, because the respected social-work professor would not exclude women from pastoral ministry.”
Mohler was way too young but handed carte blanche power and became a monstrous tyrant. He was deceptive and brutal. He enjoyed ruining those he targeted. He felt pious. Like the Great Tyrant Calvin who cleaned up Geneva into a church police state.
Btw: I have heard his radio Mohler Minute the last few days and he makes no sense. He is speaking like Piper!
@ Lea:
The secret is leadership is never about having followers but most think it is.
Lea wrote:
In exactly how many instances does the Bible say: wives submit, women can’t speak in church, husbands are servant-leaders ………?
Velour wrote:
Perhaps we should relocate Camp Backbone to Silicon Valley?
Lea wrote:
But in the next verse she is called a patron in the ESV. Not sure how that got by the censors, as the word would seem to be very problematic for the female submission crowd:
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=patron
“a lord-master…from Latin patronus…from pater (genitive patris) ‘father'”
Lydia wrote:
Sounds similar to CJ Mahaney.
Bridget wrote:
He is viewed as a Savior by many of the current SBC leaders just like several others like him who helped TAKEOVER the SBC.
Lea wrote:
They hate women and are so threatened by them.
Christiane wrote:
Sometimes I almost feel like a conspiracy theorist when I piece together all the links. I wonder if I’m seeing connections that don’t exist and that maybe it’s not as bad as I think. But the Founders site (which I discovered through TWW) has helped put those fears to rest. It turns out that Founders openly describes this conspiracy on their site. Turns out the connections are real. Here’s a great example where this is described: http://founders.org/fj71/the-other-resurgence/. Pertinent quotes:
– “It is at just this point where a second, more important ‘CR’ holds great hope for the Southern Baptist Convention. Commonly referred to as the ‘Calvinist Resurgence,’ this current movement shares one common ingredient with the first CR but has other significant dissimilarities.”
– “Unlike the first CR, however, the current resurgence is not focused on denominational institutions and agencies. It is focused on autonomous local churches.”
– “That is why your next pastor should not only be an inerrantist, but a Calvinist, because if he is, then, as Tom Nettles points out in his article, several doctrinal and spiritual benefits will attend his ministry.”
mot wrote:
Savior from what? Too many people in the SBC . . .
Ken F wrote:
Doctrinal and spiritual benefits will attend his ministry!?!? Really. That’s not what many people are finding in these churches.
@ mot:
Yes. It is creepy. You should hear the talk here about his brilliance. He is worshiped at SBTS now that it has been purified from independent thinkers.
@ Ken F:
Cult.
Bridget wrote:
From all the “liberals” that Mohler and others of his ilk removed so that the SBC would be purified like it is now and—- continue on its trend towards death of the SBC.
Law Prof wrote:
It is exactly how it is described – and not just that be we are one body. On one hand I amazed at how little this is grasped, but then realize the quest for power can be blinding.
I have been in several leadership roles over the years and with the exception of buying a business it has always happened through “bubbling up” and leading by example (i didn’t seek out the roles they usually just happened), this has happened in sports, school and work environments.
What I always felt was most important – making those around you better in pursuit of a common goal. Sports are a great example as it involves a team – working towards a goal (winning). Sure, watching the superstars perform is awesome, but I have found the greatest satisfaction comes from seeing growth with those less skilled – which is how the team actually gets better.
This doesn’t happen because things are demanded (beyond effort), or those who fall short are subjected to team “discipline” – those things are not productive…..why do some think that will work in the church?
The original post I mentioned really has it backwards…..it is the responsibility of the leader to help others reach there full potential not the other way around (which means the leader is actually doing the taking) –
True leaders look at their responsibilities for others while the wannabes crave the control and power that comes with it.
@ Ken F:
Cult.@ Robert:
Lol! You have too much common sense. :o)
@ Mike:
Great comment!
Lydia wrote:
Lydia:
Do you think folk like Mohler ever think what will happen when they face God?
Bridget wrote:
Founders launched Al Mohler. They were losing steam over the last couple of decades, but the YRRs infused new strength. Founders are gaining influence again by being pretty tightly connected to all the big names and ministries in the new-Calvinist movement. But they seem to be glad to pull strings in the background rather than being on center stage. Searching on each of the various sites by author quickly reveals the connections. For example, Tom Ascol, who is the executive director and contributing author for Founders is also a contributing author for 9Marks.
Mike wrote:
Amen! Contrary to New Calvinist patriarchal thinking about the role of husband/father vs. everyone else in the family, a good Christian husband/father-leader will strive to help all in the household reach their full potential in Christ. Only when he serves does he lead.
Mike wrote:
Isn’t it the responsibility of the Holy Spirit to help people reach their ‘potential’?
I don’t even think that’s a ‘leader’s job’.
mot wrote:
Answer: No. Because according to these guys they are among The Elect and they are ok with God.
Ken F wrote:
Yep. Mohler was the young darling of the Founders. They saw an ability in him what they could not do themselves … to lead a rebellion of young men to Calvinize the Southern Baptist Convention. The Founders used him and he used his young army to accomplish the mission.
Nancy2 wrote:
We can’t shoot Patriarchy books in my neck of the non-woods. Houston, that’s a problem.
@ mot:
They expect to hear, “well done” just as I was once confused about it, too. They think God has blessed them with success because of their followers. Otherwise, God would not allow it.
Ken F wrote:
Here’s the connection between Founders and CBMW: http://cbmw.org/uncategorized/founders-leader-advocates-complementarian-gospel-driven-marriage/. Finding connections like this is too easy…
Law Prof wrote:
Preach, Law Prof, preach!
Law Prof if we have Camp Backbone for more than 1-week we can have you as our second traveling pastor. We have a woman signed up as our first pastor.
mot wrote:
Spot on.
Lea wrote:
Well, the only word for holding controlling authority over other Christians in the New Testament is completely panned by Paul. That doesn’t seem to stop the Calvinistas from promoting an authoritarian model as biblical.
Velour wrote:
There’s 7 days. We can take turns!
Velour wrote:
I visited an SBC-YRR church plant near me, where complementarianism has been taught and embedded in the church culture. The oppression in the countenance of the women there was startling. There is no “beauty of complementarity”; it is bondage. What a sorry bunch of men to allow their families to go through this – they get hammered with subordination at church and at home. A man who will not allow his wife and daughters to experience freedom in Christ has not been set free himself.
ishy wrote:
OK, if you insist.
What will devotions be like? Could you give a sermon about Camp Backbone’s patron saint, Jael?
Velour wrote:
They would rather people go to HELL than be told the Good News of Christ from a woman!
Max wrote:
I remembered your reporting your visits to those NeoCalvinist churches. Oppression indeed.
Yes, what Jesus Christ do these men ‘know’?
Max wrote:
They know Calvin but not Jesus. It really is beyond sad.
mot wrote:
So true.
When I started getting fed up with all of the shenigans at my ex-NeoCal church, I remembered the Presbyterian women medical missionaries (doctors) that my grandmother knew. Those women practiced medicine and carried the Gospel in remote parts of the world. They changed lives!!
^sorry…typo. Posted too soon.
Velour wrote:
And yet the SBC will not “let” women share the Gospel, because they are women.
Velour wrote:
I’m big on context. We will have to examine Judges 4 verse by verse, and what that meant in terms of Israel and Deborah’s leadership.
Velour wrote:
The new reformers talk more about “God” and themselves, than they do Jesus.
Velour wrote:
We bumped into a young man and his wife at one of the NeoCal churches that we knew from a previous church experience – before New Calvinism swept into our area. In the former church, she was very involved in various ministry activities, always very bubbly and friendly, with a servant spirit and obvious love for others. The sadness she now carried in the YRR church broke our hearts. There was no spiritual outlet for her in the new environment she was in. It was the difference between night and day – or, I should say between darkness and light. Her husband, a small group leader and elder candidate in the YRR church, seemed happy enough however.
Off topic prayer request: please pray for my only sibling …… my 43 year old brother. He just found out today that part of his heart is not working properly. He goes for a dye test tomorrow.
ishy wrote:
We do not discrimate.
mot wrote:
Be afraid, gentlemen. Be very afraid 🙂
Nancy2 wrote:
Praying right now, Nancy2.
ishy wrote:
OK.
Max wrote:
Exactly. And the Holy Spirit? No where to be seen.
Max wrote:
As far as I can tell, our current church is not YRR. I do believe there are some Calvinists there, but I can’t prove it. This church is more restrictive (and insulting) towards women than any church I’ve ever attended. At the time we moved to this church, we had some marriage problems and I had some health problems. I have wondered I my husband chose this church because of the way it treats women, but he says he’s never noticed probably because he’s a man.
After we started attending this church, I was headed in the same direction as this young lady ……. down. But, I’m older ….. maybe more hardheaded….. I have a lot of fight in me.
I read and googled and researched, trying to figure out ow a church could be so condescending towards women (hello, TWW!). I came back, fangs bared and hackles up! I have decided that I will not participate in a church that does not grant women full membership rights. If church business is none of my business, then my money and the use of my volunteer time is none of the church’s business.
mot wrote:
Given the way they have treated women, they should feel threatened now more so than ever!
@ Nancy2:
Just prayed for your brother.
Nancy2 wrote:
Presbyterian women is a ‘thing’. That’s what they call all their ladies groups. I like it since I’ve linked it to the ‘elder women’ bit.
Nancy2 wrote:
I’m so sorry Nancy! Will pray tonight.
Nancy2 wrote:
Snort. Indeed.
Did you see the mummy? I’m somehow reminded of the ‘nasty little persons such as yourself always get their comeuppance’ line.
mot wrote:
I’m not even a Baptist, but the SBC used to let women do these things… from what I’ve heard. And as they say today, with the new restrictions on women not even Lottie Moon would be allowed to serve.
It’s just despicable.
A.Stacey wrote:
What do you mean by showing too much testosterone? It sounds like you’re saying that the men who hang out here and are against comp-ism have less “testosterone,” in other words, are weak men. Personally, I think only a weak, little man wants to put someone (like a woman) down to boost himself up.
Velour wrote:
“Therefore encourage one another and build each other up”
It is for all of us to do, a priesthood of the believers type of thing.
AbuseCrusher wrote:
I will look into this, especially time lines and when who knew what… if I can.
AbuseCrusher wrote:
I realize that FBC LR sort of ‘birthed’ some of these other fellowship churches, but just to be clear, are you aware of any coordination between them on these points? As far as I know they act more or less independently, and the major fellowship issues I’ve seen have been at churches outside arkansas. (well, there was one thing, but it hasn’t been reported and as far as I know was handled correctly).
On the complete opposite end of the spectrum from the dish towel giveaway are my church’s “Man Day” activities, which I mentioned in the last post. These are men-only socials that involve some sort of heavy physical activity – ranging from flag football to firing guns at a shooting range (cue the photo in the post), to the latest genius idea thought up by leadership – paintball.
As a male with an extremely small build and issues with both knees (and don’t have a particular interest in sports or extreme activities that could risk injury), I cannot participate in these events. Their tagline, “Be there, or be a girl” is especially offensive to both the female congregants and to the males that can’t participate in “Man Day.”
“Lady Day” activities aren’t as bad as dish towels (their next one is a self-defense class) but what strikes me is that the church believes all men should be tough and physical, without considering those (like me) who aren’t.
AnonInNC wrote:
I’ve been told that you can skip such events and just have someone jab you with the end of a broom handle to get the same effect.
Lydia wrote:
Interesting article about malignant narcissists as religious leaders- http://drzeiders.com/special-archives/a-psychological-autopsy-of-a-malignant-narcissist-in-church-leadership-a-composite-scenario-with-discussion/
@ Nancy2:
Praying, Nancy.
Max wrote:
Preach it, Max!
Max wrote:
This is so sad. I guess if you’re a woman in these churches, you need to keep your light under a bushel.
Bill M wrote:
I get that.
But I just think it smacks of heavy-Shepherding, or some kind of sales pitch/pyramid scheme, to say that a pastor is supposed to help us reach our ‘potential’. I came out of a church like that. It ended up being having to listen to their insufferable advice,
paste on a smile of gratitude, toss ‘a bone’ of thanks the pastors/elders’ way, and make ones’ escape from such lunacy.
People who think they’re in charge of someone else’s ‘potential’ have no healthy boundaries, in my opinion.
AnonInNC wrote:
I hope someone has told them how offensive their “be there or be a girl” quote is. Problem is, they most likely think women and femininity are inferior.
On a related note, I just found this:
http://religionnews.com/2016/08/30/how-the-christian-masculinity-movement-is-ruining-men/
Patriciamc wrote:
It is the type of thing an eight year old boy would say, beyond the age of twelve or thirteen it becomes a sign or arrested development.
AnonInNC wrote:
It’s High School Jock culture all over again.
With one difference: High School would have said “Be there or be a Fag.”
(In high school I was the 120-lb (55-kilo) wet noodle.)
Patriciamc wrote:
And the comment thread on that article is just insane.
Knock-down-drag-out “DIE, HERETIC!”
Velour wrote:
Sounds like we agree
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Over at Thom Rainer’s blog on an article he wrote about “Church Discipline”, I posted a short summary of my tour-of-duty of an authoritarian NeoCalvnist church. It was like Salem Witch Trials II. Critical thinking skills and questions got members disciplined.
Capriciously applied, with pastors/elders exempt and their equally abusive friends.
A commenter over there noted that NO ONE responded to my post about church discipline.
Bill M wrote:
Yeah.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
The fruits of the Spirit…
siteseer wrote:
As I read that article, I kept hearing echoes of a certain book on my shelves — the 1943 OSS psychological profile of a certain A.Hitler. The parallel with the most impact was suicide orchestrated for maximum narcissistic effect.
As M Scott Peck put it in People of the Lie, there is a much older term for Malignant Narcissism — EVIL.
siteseer wrote:
Or flamewar.
I was introduced to flamewars and trolling in the mid-Seventies, in the pages of a D&D fanzine. Mimeograph flamewars just as wild and crazy as Internet flamewars, but with a turnaround time of two months instead of two seconds. So this craziness has been there for a while, just Web-based communications increased the pace.
Bill M wrote:
Great point! I had not thought about it that way. Of course, the neo-cals will say that the mother’s at fault.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
LOL! Yeah, the crazies are out. I commented that Christ didn’t say anything about how men should be men and women should be women. I’m sure I’ve received some interesting comments
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
I went back over and spread a little Christ-centered estrogen around. The cave men types probably think they’re got cooties now.
One comment that I was very proud of was when I said that the “be a man” movement denies men the right to be individuals (and denies women everything).
@ AnonInNC:
“Their tagline, “Be there, or be a girl” is especially offensive to both the female congregants and to the males that can’t participate in “Man Day.”
…what strikes me is that the church believes all men should be tough and physical, without considering those (like me) who aren’t.”
+++++++++++++++++
i’m sorry for what you experience, being in an organization with ignoramuses for leaders. have you clued them in?
Patriciamc wrote:
I liked your response!
mot wrote:
looks like they are confusing the message with the messenger ….. Our Lord Himself had no such problem, when He appointed the Apostola Apostolorum to go to His Apostles with the news of His resurrection.
https://aleteiaen.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/apostorum-apostola.jpg?w=779
@ Christiane:
” ….. the celebration of Saint Mary Magdalene was elevated and inscribed in the General Roman Calendar with the rank of Feast.
This decision, in the current ecclesial context, seeks to reflect more deeply upon the dignity of women, on the new evangelisation and on the greatness of the mystery of God’s Mercy. Saint John Paul II paid great attention not only to the importance of women in the mission of Christ and the Church, but also and with special emphasis on the particular role of Mary of Magdala as the first witness who saw the risen Christ, and as the first messenger who announced the Lord’s resurrection to the Apostles (Mulieris dignitatem n. 16). The importance of this continues today in the Church, as is evident in the new evangelisation, which seeks to welcome all men and women “of every race, people, language and nation” (Rev 5: 9), without any distinction, to announce to them the Good News of the Gospel of Jesus Christ while accompanying them on their earthly pilgrimage, and offering them the wonders of God’s salvation. Saint Mary Magdalene is an example of a true and authentic evangeliser, that is an evangelist who announces the central joyful message of Easter (cf. Collect for 22 July and the new Preface).”
http://aleteia.org/2016/06/10/mary-magdalene-apostle-to-the-apostles-given-equal-dignity-in-feast/#sthash.b9MeeHE7.dpuf
AnonInNC wrote:
I was a youth leader in a church for several years. The youth pastor loved sports and thought that they should play some sort of sports most weeks. There was always a group of kids who refused to play on the sidelines looking bored. This group was pretty evenly gendered, and had some kids that seemed to be fairly athletic. They often complained to me that youth group was more like PE class, and they wouldn’t come except their parents made them.
I remember a singles group planning meeting where the leader said we should start a softball team. His argument was “Everyone likes sports, so we should play a sport.” The rest of us, male and female, had no interest in it, but he kept arguing for it for about an hour and finally said he was just tabling it for later.
I think there’s always a hazard in not only stereotyping, but planning only one type of activity because that’s what the leaders enjoy or think everyone likes.
Not all men like sports. I despite pink with every fiber of my being, and will only wear it for charity events. I have male friends who are much happier to read a book and have an intellectual discussion than play Airsoft (like paintball). I have a female friend who has three black belts.
A women’s ministry leader once asked me why I didn’t come to one of their studies. I asked her if they had any studies on books of the Bible like the men. She looked startled, and admitted they didn’t, and they only had one group that wasn’t reading a book about marriage or kids that might interest me the childless single. (They had Bible book studies from then on, so kudos to her for fixing it.)
People are more complex than most mens, womens, student ministries want to make people. I know it makes planning much easier to stereotype everyone, but ministries are often so narrow-minded that they leave out large groups of people, not just a few.
BTW, almost everyone agrees on eating. Just saying…
ishy wrote:
Right? You’ll never go wrong there!
@ Patriciamc:
Goodness, those comments.
Someone referred to the ‘sissification’ of church and they don’t see that that’s a problem????
Another complained that there is no bow hunting and car fixing in the sanctuary, basically (he complained that if you didn’t have skills in music and arts and oh stuff they actually do in the church service there was nothing to contribute at church). I mean, do you want to start a hunting ministry?
@ ishy:
Also, when I was in youth group we actually went horseback riding, shooting, to the lake, and amusement parks…nobody felt the need to seclude any of it by sex.
Still reading those comments. Oy.
Lea wrote:
Yeah, well, I guess thinking and reading were skills he didn’t posses, either.
ishy wrote:
He literally said he didn’t like to read books.
siteseer wrote:
I’ve been preachin’ this stuff for the better part of my adult life. Not too many folks listen. I’ve been called harsh, critical, mean-spirited. I used to think it was my delivery, because I knew it was truth. Then I realized the organized church doesn’t want to hear it – it’s too troubling, that stuff happens elsewhere, we aren’t like that, we are comfortable with things as they are, you are too fundamental, etc., etc. And so the beat goes on. Before you know it, an army of young whippersnappers will come in and try to change everything (oh, wait a minute …).
ishy wrote:
Yes and yes on all points!
Lea wrote:
Sometimes comments bother me, other times I find them funny. Last night I just couldn’t help but laugh. As for the hunting or doing car things in church, seriously? As ishy said, I don’t think thinking is one of his strong skills.
Can you imagine telling the minister of a highly liturgical church that they need to do car and hunting things in service, or maybe weight lifting? Can’t you just see the look on their face? LOL.
Patriciamc wrote:
I’m reading one now from somebody who claims that a lesbian became interested in math after taking testosterone!!!
That’s just…
Patriciamc wrote:
Oh man, jail, but did you read the comment from ‘flexpar’? He’s trying to be all sciency and what he says is so much nonsense. Like testosterone makes you love math. Um. No.
AnonInNC wrote:
I would suggest that on ‘Man Day’, they have a workshop on Preventing Child Abuse OR maybe ‘The Problem of Domestic Violence in America’ …. now THAT is a worthy and manly way to spend time in a Church-related environment that supposedly supports ‘family values’. 🙂
Being ‘manly’ has to do with character, not muscles. There are reports of too many patristic males out there messing around on the down-low not to know that anything that promotes character-building is needed badly among this crowd. Yeah, bring in Social Services and the Police Department for a workshop for the ‘men’, and make their Day. 🙂
Patriciamc wrote:
I don’t think many of the Gospel Glitterati are in danger of being masculine, if those are the criteria.
He made a very good point at the end about striving to be more like Christ rather than striving to achieve any human notion of masculinity or femininity. Is our primary identity being “masculine” or “feminine” or is it being in Christ?
I’m thinking the gender balance in churches that are feminized might be helped by a significant number of women leaving. Just saying no to this insanity. Then the manly men who are left can fight each other for “headship” and leadership. This is so anti-Christian, IMO.
Why must either men *or* women fit into tight boxes?
ishy wrote:
My husband – retired military (Green Beret, 5th Group Special Forces) Jump Master, Halo Team, among other things …….. We have wood heat. He cuts trees on our farm with a chain saw, hauls wood with his tractor…….
He has never played on any kind of sports team, not even a game of pick-up basketball ….. never touched a football. He loves to read. He will wash dishes and sweep floors. When I was very ill, he learned to make homemade jam and jelly, and still makes it! He is tough, but he’s very quite and reserved.
Me – raised on a farm, rough and tumble style. Sure, I cook, do home canning, sew (2 machines), crochet …… But, I played sports on teams in school and at church (track, basketball, fast-pitch softball, flag football). I love University of Kentucky basketball games, pro-football, standard transmission vehicles, and NASCAR. As a freshman in high school, my teachers seated me with the “bad boys” because they quickly learned that I would ring those boys’ bells if they misbehaved. The first time a ” bad boy” pinched my behind in science class, he was sitting on a table and I turned the table over. He hit the floor hard. The teacher “never saw or heard a thing”. I never got in trouble.
As a couple, we have gone camping, hunting, hiked up mountains, canoed down rivers, and both of us loved every minute of all of it. Is something wrong with us, or is something wrong with them?
Gram3 wrote:
It’s like the blame women when too many of them go to church. And then they blame them if there are too many women’s activities. I see a theme here. They also miss the point of the article, which is that it’s not about being manly, it’s about being like Christ. That is supposed to be the point.
Nancy2 wrote:
Them.
Gram3 wrote:
It is so bizarre. It’s like they want to make everyone into little cookie cutter images. That’s not how people are. I don’t understand that mentality at all.
Nancy2 wrote:
Your husband is not ‘threatened’ by your strength, NANCY TWO. He’s probably proud of you, as you are obviously proud of his military service to our country.
I think these men who NEED a ‘manly personna’ likely are making up for some loss, whether it is a psychological healthy sexual identity, or some perceived or real lack in their male ‘performance’ abilities;
and the response to this personal crisis is that they must demean women who ‘threaten’ them by whatever means these men view as ‘feminism’.
The louder a man in patriarchy shouts about his ‘manliness’, the more I would question the reality of his own view of it. This is sad, but apparently he and those like him NEED to put women ‘in their place’, and maintain for themselves a ‘man-ufactured’ gospel of ‘male headship’.
These men are pathetic. Women in their lives should NOT be enabling these men, certainly not for ‘religious’ reasons. It’s just a very unhealthy situation for all involved. And the children suffer too.
Nancy2 wrote:
It’s them. By the way, love the description of your relationship, you married an authentic man.
Nancy2 wrote:
Our youngest daughter, 9, who’s sandwiched in the middle of six boys in birth order, is something like you. She’s outnumbered and she’s slight of build compared to all the other children in our huge brood, but she’s grown to be fierce and will ball up her little fist and hit as hard as she can if the boys try to knock her around. They’ve learned that while she’s not big enough to take them out, she will undeniably get her shots in, so they’ve come to respect her, something like that fierce spitting kitten which you’ve cornered, but dare not pick up.
Haven’t read all the comments so forgive me if this is a repeat of someone else.
I think how these churches place less worth on women and children definitely dictates the response to the crimes we have seen occur.
The focus is on the man. Therefore the focus is on the man’s sin and redemption. The woman and child are lesser and everything they do is subordinate to the man. So if the man is the pinnacle the women and children may even be blamed for his downfall.
Sick thinking.
Women & men are equal in every way. Normally I’m a live and let live guy but not on this point. Not with the damage this pathological obsession with Male headship is causing.
Velour wrote:
Only if it means I sit down and shut up and help others. LOL!
Gram3 wrote:
I could see that… Bible Church is a strict Calvi church… I’m not sure, I bet their church building doesn’t even have windows. To me almost 180 from FBC. The “Quiver Folks” I spoke of came from there.
Some history here. Little Rock Christian Schools was originally in the LR Bible Church’s old location. LR Christian is the PRERMIER christian school in the area, it’s big and has a lot of $$$ backing. It sits across the street from LRBC, by now I do not think they have any affiliation.
Christiane wrote:
Like the preachers who claim to have been Navy SEALs?
(The retired SEAL who maintains the personnel database to spot fakes remarked in an interview that “a lot of them are preachers”.)
Nancy2 wrote:
“Them”, of course! Those who control hate truth-tellers. That’s why they marginalize, shun and/or excommunicate them.
Law Prof wrote:
You can do that during the first week. Sunday 2 is all yours.
Jack wrote:
This is true in every way they talk about women. They are to build up men, support men, help men fulfill their potential.
Jack wrote:
I think you’re right on this. Not only that, though, they also tend to believe men over women too. So in abusive situations, they discount the woman’s (or child’s) account and accept the mans. And the abusers have probably been grooming these people (pastors, elders, counselors) anyway, so they are doubly likely to believe them.
Gram3 wrote:
Right? What difference does it make if a man is musically inclined or if he likes to sit in a deer stand? Same for women. Can’t they both still be Christians? I’m getting more and more fed up that this is even an issue. I’m not raising my sons in a church that is going to judge them on their “manliness” any more than I’d raise my daughters in a church that treats them like second class citizens.
Gram3 wrote:
Ouch…LOL.
Although if Mohler, Dever, Piper, Challies, Burke, etc. were forced into a paintball tournament, that might be rather entertaining to watch.
NJ wrote:
They’d probably all be sitting on the sidelines trying to tell everyone else how to win.
NJ wrote:
Paintball? Oh, no, no, no no. That isn’t manly enough.
I have a 10 month old coon hound who needs training. If these guys think they can keep up with a woman and a female coon hound, I’ll take them down in the woods for an all night coon hunting expedition!
Dever is a Kentucky boy, but he still might wet his panties when the coyotes start howling and the bobcats scream. I’d have to get a special camera to photograph the expression on Piper’s face.
I wonder if they even own appropriate clothing and footwear for a sporting event like that.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
i believe the greater damage may be to the young men who grow up with the idea that they’re superior in their manliness (and the delusions of grandeur that gives them, what brittle, weak, pathetic men such treatment produces) than it does to the women who grow up thinking they’re second rate (who may grow up warped in their own way, but not generally as ugly and helpless as the men who’s egos are stroked).
@ A.Stacy:
Once upon a time I knew the backstory between the two churches and the school. But a lot of water has gone under the bridge since then.
I presume you are a conservative evangelical if you go to either church. If so, do you not find it odd that they assign universal “roles” of “leader” and “submitter” to males and females respectively without having any textual basis at all for asserting that is God’s good and beautiful design? ISTM that something that universal should be found in Genesis 1-2, yet it is simply not there! Even the 1 Timothy 2 clobber verse, if it is considered a universal proscription, lacks grounding in Genesis 1-2. And without that grounding, each of Paul’s proffered reasons is a non-sequitur if Paul’s proscription *must* be a universal one. And, if 1 Timothy 2 is the explainer for Genesis 1-2, how in the world did anyone know what their God-ordained Role was before Paul told Timothy? If it is a Gospel imperative, then ISTM that someone might have mentioned it before 1 Timothy.
We call one of my pugs, Tulip, *coon hound.* Every night she waits for the inevitable raccoon to come to try to steal bird seed on our deck. We have a doggy door and she goes tearing out and a race ensues, with the coon always climbing a tree. But Tulip is so proud of herself racing around the house proclaiming her prowess.
Gram3 wrote:
The only imperative is Jesus Christ and Him as Lord and God. Anyone who makes gender roles or any other detail such as method of baptism, clothing choices, drinking or not, an imperative is presenting a false gospel and is a dangerous liar who should be exposed and condemned.
Gram3 wrote:
They use some pretty twisted logic to try to make it be in genesis, but you basically have to ignore the meaning of words for it to work.
Law Prof wrote:
One thing this movement seems to be missing is an emphasis on character, which for churches is kinda scary. I mean, have you ever heard Driscoll preach? It’s all “be a manly man and have lots of sex”, but he has no good character so certainly doesn’t seem to preach about having one.
A lot of warriors in history have codes of honor. Not to say that they were all good or all followed their codes, but there was often an emphasis on being both a man and also being honorable. Protect the weak. Defend the truth. Fight with honor and dignity. I hear none of that from these pastors.
I will note that “Protect the weak” historically hasn’t meant “Keep them weak so you can make a big show of protecting them.” You’re not really very strong if you have to put down people to make yourself look stronger.
ishy wrote:
Character is “works salvation’. You are supposed to be a totally depraved perpetual sinner no better or more innocent than a child molester.
(Sigh)
Law Prof wrote:
You may be right. My experience with Patriarchy, especially within an authoritarian church, is that it can be emasculating to men who are expected to submit to fathers and church leaders. I unknowingly married into my FIL’s harem. My poor husband was constantly belittled for not being the Head Of Household (HOH) and requiring me to submit to what church leaders wanted. I guess the ones I’ve found to feel superior in their manliness are the ones with Power and Position. They are usually the ones on the church’s dole who have never done manual labor to support their families.
Judging by the sweaty gym odor in my boys’ bedroom, they’ve got plenty of testosterone. I just want them to grow into healthy adults who can take care of themselves. They prefer video games. My husband likes guns. As long as they love me and treat me with respect, I don’t care.
Lydia wrote:
And become So Spiritual you cease to be human.
Lydia wrote:
You’re probably right.
Except women. We’re supposed to be perfect little submissive dolls all the time, and must be disciplined when we are not.
Lydia wrote:
Sigh indeed.
ishy wrote:
Don’t forget how everything that goes wrong is our fault!!
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
At which point, you prove you have a pair by forcing submission from YOUR inferiors and the Skubalon rolls downhill.
The General yells at the Colonel;
The Colonel yells at the Major;
The Major yells at the Captain;
The Captain yells at the LT;
The LT yells at Sgt Snorkel;
Sgt Snorkel yells at Private Bailey;
Private Bailey kicks the barracks dog.
ishy wrote:
I just flashed on Christian Domestic Discipline(TM), AKA “PAPA SPANK! SPANK! SPANK!”
@ Nancy2:
Praying for your brother, Nancy2
Patriciamc wrote:
I’ve been in Furry Fandom for twenty years.
I am VERY familiar with “the crazies are out”.
Jack wrote:
It’s a sick and twisted religion period.
Former CLCer wrote:
Count me in for your Bro too Nancy2.
mot wrote:
I imagine they think of God in a manner much like Screwtape hoped for:
“…we have taught men to say ‘my God’ in a sense not really very different from ‘my boots’, meaning ‘the God on whom I have a claim for my distinguished services and whom I exploit from the pulpit — the God I have done a corner in.’ “
Patriciamc wrote:
I could go on and on. But “Christian masculinity” will always be defined by brutish caricatures. Because a church full of real biblical men (but really, biblical people) would be asking questions likes where the money is going and why do staff and elders follow those websites on Twitter and not caring about what names they get called for doing so.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Yes. And there’s plausible deniability built in that makes the dog responsible for everything wrong.
ishy wrote:
Well, Doug Phillips certainly sang that song. But it turned out to be completely phony showmanship.
Lea wrote:
So maybe becoming good at math makes a woman a lesbian? LOL
Christiane wrote:
That’s a great idea.
When the leadership brought in the Authentic Manhood where my husband was going to church, one of the men wondered why the men couldn’t all just get together and do something for someone needy in the church instead. That didn’t go over.
Law Prof wrote:
Amen!
Jack wrote:
Agreed, and it’s turning a lot of people off to Christ.
siteseer wrote:
Bless him! If I lived near that guy I would be happy to bake him a million cookies, as part of my ‘authentic womanhood’.
Patriciamc wrote:
It is so healing after hearing all these awful stories to go to church and see women preaching and reading the liturgy and serving as elders. Truly. It soothes me.
ishy wrote:
Exactly! Keeping people weak is exactly what they do! Only weak, little people have to put down others in order to feel big.
siteseer wrote:
We could say thesame thing for the women. I’d rather gather in service for someone than for tea, food, or endless teaching. . .
@ Bridget:
Yes. Like all those women at my friend’s church who are paying 100 bucks to go hear Mary Mohler speak. Better use of that 3-4000 bucks toward someone struggling in their congregation. Churches have become so shallow.
Lydia wrote:
I don’t really get this whole conference thing anyway.
I am on record as thinking potlucks and fellowship is part of the point of church to begin with, so I wouldn’t say it should all be abandoned, but paying a bunch of money or spending hours and hours to learn how to be “authentic” is just stupid. Be yourself. There. Saved you time and money!
Now, let’s focus on teaching people to love each other and be decent.
elastigirl wrote:
When I brought it up, they said something to the effect was that was all in humor. They’ve stopped using it for the more recent Man Days, so maybe I (or somebody else) finally got through to them.
Fun fact: In some of their video announcements, they actually had a female church volunteer use the “be there or be a girl” tagline.
Fun fact 2: During a past Man Day, I was actually at a fan convention in costume/cosplay as a female character, so in a sense I “was a girl” when I wasn’t there (at Man Day.)
ishy wrote:
And I’m a male who likes cute, flowery things, and a lot of the shows I watch have female main characters and a distinct lack of action, but other than that, my interests are too varied and unique to put them under either a “masculine” or “feminine” label. So far, none of the church socials/”fellowship” activities have appealed to me. Even the “open to both genders” ones have always been things like hiking, camping, and white water rafting. So I’m thinking that this church expects everyone, male and female, to be tough and physical.
Christiane wrote:
That would be a Man Day that I’d actually have interest in attending, since it would address a very real issue and not just an excuse for the guys to flex their muscles.
Lea wrote:
Eye roll. My daughter and I can’t wait for Hidden Figures. It’s about time Katherine Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan, and Mary Jackson had wider recognition.
siteseer wrote:
Yeah, go repair someone’s broken fence when that tree fell on it! Or build houses for Habitat for Humanity! Or mow the lawn of some of the elderly!
It should be called Unauthentic Manboy.
@Velour
You know, we could do a online virtual camp? Those virtual conferences are pretty popular. I’ve been to writing ones and virtual reality ones.
Lydia wrote:
I have been to a few Christian conferences, but usually as a worship leader. None of them were worth the money except the one that cost nothing to attend but we prayed all day long for the nation. I paid for food, and we camped, so cost almost nothing.
Lydia wrote:
“There’s a sucker born every minute.”
— P.T.Barnum
Lea wrote:
It’s never too late for that. 🙂
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
That actually looked really good!
ishy wrote:
Great minds think alike!!
ishy wrote:
Seriously, we should do a virtual camp. Design the target practice. Post campers’ favorite recipes (biscuits, etc.). Have virtual food served.
This would be fun to do. We could have our t-shirts ordered from some place online.
Submit designs.
We could have it during Council on Biblical Manhood Womanhood’s annul conference week.
Email me at my website blog’s contact info.
We could even have virtual sermons and devotions by you and Law Prof, and others.
This would BE FUN!
https://gbfsvchurchabuse.org/contact/
dee wrote:
Awww. It’s a proverbial Calvin’s “Geneva” at your house with the coon playing the role of the dissenter.
Patriciamc wrote:
Yes, I know. I’m one of them.
@ AnonInNC:
hmmm….. is going to your church time well-spent?
@ Lea:
“…but paying a bunch of money or spending hours and hours to learn how to be “authentic” is just stupid.”
+++++++++++
good grief….. it’s like church has programmed away the human self and the mind into something weird & undesirable. so now they have to reprogram people again into something less undesirable, which they’ve decided to call “authenticity”.
yeah…..
ridiculous
anyone remember “walk acros the room” (the whole bible study series devoted to introducing yourself to someone new…. because christians stopped knowing how to do it)? wonder how many of our tithe dollars went towards that.
the christian church — the silliest place on earth.
ishy wrote:
so ‘paintball’ is more ‘manly’? oh, please 🙂
elastigirl wrote:
It is too easy to figure out why so many people are not interested in church. People in these churches would rather spend their money on anything-conferences, etc. than reach out and help needy and hurting people. As I have mentioned before I continue to pastor in the SBC, but if God had not called me to Pastor sadly what i see most churches doing these days, I would not be interested in these churches. It is all too sad, but I have not given up yet.
Lydia wrote:
It would seem so from these howlers leading up to his takeover at SBTS:
Associated Press, 1989:
“Editor Named
ATLANTA (AP) – A centrist Southern Baptist has been named the new editor of The Christian Index, the newspaper of the Georgia Baptist Convention. Richard Albert Molder Jr., 29, will begin in the job June 1.”
New York Times, 1991:
“disaffected Southern Baptists set up an organization today that will allow them to operate independently of the conservative leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention….the new body, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, would be an organizational and spiritual anchor for alternatives to the denomination’s major programs”
“Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., the editor of The Christian Index, which is published by the Georgia Baptist Convention,…said he had not endorsed either either side in the quarrel.”
Baptist Press, 1993:
“LOUISVILLE, Ky. (BP)–Questions about the role of women in ministry dominated the first meeting between Southern Baptist Theological Seminary’s president-elect and students. R. Albert Mohler Jr., who will assume the presidency of Southern Baptists’ oldest institution Aug. 1, reiterated his personal opposition to women serving as pastors of churches during a question-and-answer forum April 8 with more than 300 students. Mohler said, however, he believes other ministry positions could be filled by women. He also emphasized all degree programs of the seminary will be open to female students and that faculty members commit no ‘theological offense’ if their views on that issue differ from the president’s.”
Oops, I misspelled Mohler as “Molder” in the AP story!
I just had a thought here. These so called classes on how to be a man, should be retitled how to be a Bully to women and others. For to me, that’s what they are bullies. I for one don’t want anything to do with them. I grew up with a family that no matter what the need was in the church, our family was always helping out. These were the days before Habit for Humanity or another organization like this. If someone needed help on something, they asked. People at the church knew who to call on for certain things. That’s what being a man of God is. Willing and able to help out those less fortunate and others in need, plus be there for their family. Same thing goes for being a woman of God. We need millions more of them.
Many thanks to all for the prayers!!!
Tests on my brother came back well!!! No probs with the heart. Irregularities may be caused by a hernia, acid reflux, ulcer, and/or stress. Very good news for our family!
Nancy2 wrote:
Wonderful news, Nancy2. Tell him we were praying for him!
Jerome wrote:
Your keyboard speaks “truth”.
I now call the convention at Captain “Molder”‘s command the Sunk Baptist Convention.
@ Jerome:
Many people don’t know that Mohler was a liberal in the liberal wing of the SBC. He even worked for one of the liberal Seminary presidents raising money. He was not even comp!
But he saw the tide changing and stabbed his former friends in the back to ride the power politics gravy train.
I have always maintained that Mohler is not a doctrinal ideologue. He is a tactical politician. He makes Carville and Atwater look like amateurs.
dee wrote:
Tee hee! Me thinks Tulip believes in reincarnation. She surely was a pure bred coon hound in a past life.
ishy wrote:
Protect the weak, paying no mind to the gender.
Patriciamc wrote:
Yeah. I guess my husband is in big trouble. He is married to a former math teacher. What would that assumption make him?
Hi Folks,
Harley just sent me a beautiful poem she just wrote and gave me permission to publish it on my blog about church abuse.
Here it is: https://gbfsvchurchabuse.org/2016/09/07/poem-will-you-stand-with-me-by-geva-roberts/
By the way, I love you folks and I’m so glad to know you. You each are gifted and make my life better.
Nancy2 wrote:
Yay!
siteseer wrote:
Exactly. A church we used to go to did help people in our church and the surrounding area ….. Did work in houses of elderly people, fall and winter clean up detail, painting ……..
We also had a crew who prepared meals and took them to the sick and those who had just lost loved ones.
We served the community, in Jesus’ name.
Wanna be a real man (or a real woman)? Put down the paint balls and pick up a paint brush! Spend all that “Authentic Manhood” and seminar money on supplies to re-shingle somebody’s roof!
Lydia wrote:
This one man has caused untold damage.
Ishy & H.U.G. and anybody else,
If we made an online version of Camp Backbone, like issue is suggesting, do you have any ideas of how we could do that?
That would actually be fun! We could have it during the week when Council on Biblical Manhood Womanhood has its Spring conference.
That would be a riot.
mot wrote:
Indeed he has. I’m not a Baptist. But if I’d only known his lack of personal ethics in dealings with other Christians, I would have NEVER listened to a word he wrote on major Christian subjects.
When a person can’t live it out in their life, they have NOTHING to say.
Velour wrote:
Sadly, he appears untouchable by the major leaders in the SBC.
@ Nancy2:
Good news, Nancy! So glad to hear it!
Velour wrote:
Photographs, cartoons images, recipes?
But, we must respect the sensibilities of others, or at least post a warning when it comes to photographs. …. nothing violent. We would have to make up a set of rules and screen everything.
Uhm, you would have to screen most of the things I would submit.
Velour wrote:
If I couldn’t actually go to wherever CBMW is having its conference (and yes, I am thinking about it), I would rather hijack the CBMW hashtag on Twitter. Those guys were just So Upset that Uppity Wimmins like me could just take over their #CBMW hashtag. Of course, if I went to the CBMW shindig, I’d just stand out on the sidewalk with a sign that says, “CBMW has nothing to say to me, a single woman. And CBMW shouldn’t say anything to ANY woman.”
mirele wrote:
I think it is past time for men and women to stand up against the lies passed off as truth by the CBMW. Thank the good Lord for the internet–something I am sure the leaders of the CBMW fear.
mirele wrote:
I’m with you, Mirele. I use the CBMW hashtag throughout the year and already started using #CBMW17.
Nancy2 wrote:
But you’re our fearless leader, Nancy2. We can’t have a censored leader of Camp Backbone.
Seriously, do you guys know how we could do an online camp like Ishy suggested. That would be great!!!
mot wrote:
I figured as much.
mirele wrote:
If you go to the conference, wear leggings. They hate leggings. Big, big, big lecture time.
Velour wrote:
I do not know why he is untouchable? He is just one SBC President.
You know, I don’t think the next CBMW conference will be until 2018, when the T4G boyz hold their conference in Louisville from April 11-13. I suspect that CBMW will be on April 10 as a pre-conference, based on what happened this year. I guess I’ll be penciling in CBMW and T4G for a trip in 2018.
However, knowing these guys, I’m sure there will be some other equally as offensive conferences between now and 2018, with hashtags ripe for the hijacking. And I will hijack, because I’m tired of women being treated like doormats and floor rugs.
elastigirl wrote:
I’ve been asking myself that for some time now. Now, I’m only there out of curiosity with an exit strategy in mind – in early October, leadership plans to announce their new shepherding accountability system to members, and I’m curious as to how many people protest it and how many blindly accept it (I’m thinking the numbers will skew toward the latter, sadly.) After that, I’ll be out of town for three weeks, during which time I’ll formally submit a resignation letter (when it’ll be harder for them to get in touch with me.) I’ve been testing the waters with a more traditional church in the meantime, where I haven’t seen and red flags thus far, and I’ll probably start attending there more often once I get back from my family visit.
mirele wrote:
You, go, Mirele. If it’s 2018, I might just join you there too. Sign and everything.
In the meantime, we should plan our online Camp Backbone and figure out how to do that. Ot would be a hoot.
^It
ishy wrote:
Fellowship Bible Church, Little Rock AR is not now nor has it ever been affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention. FBCLR is completely independent, non-denominational. Just wanted to make that clarification.
Gram3 wrote:
Here’s how i keep them straight. Bible Church of LR is Masters Seminary. Fellowship Bible Church of LR is Dallas Seminary. BCLR is law. FBCLR is grace (more or less).
Nancy2 wrote:
+1 on getting the accountabilibuddies in my small group to wake up on a Saturday morning and get their hands dirty while serving the poor with me being like pulling teeth at my ex gospel™ centered church.
@ AnonInNC:
“…leadership plans to announce their new shepherding accountability system to
members,”
+++++++++++++
a ‘shepherding accountability system’…. what in the world….
can you report back on what this is?
what issues/activities are tracked?
who does the tracking? & is that person accountable to someone else?
how is it done?
what are the rules people are accountable to follow?
who decided on these rules?
what are the consequences when one breaks the rules?
if they don’t spell this all out, can you raise hand to ask?
Lea wrote:
Fellowship Bible Church, Little Rock AR was founded by three guys – Robert Lewis, Bill Wellons, and Bill Parkinson. Wellons’ son is the pastor of Fellowship Nashville/Brentwood where they are in a lawsuit regarding mishandling of a child sex abuse case. TWW has covered this. Parkinson’s son was a founding pastor of Fellowship Memphis, along with John Bryson and Bryan Loritts. Ben Parkinson is now the lead pastor back at his dad’s church in Little Rock, although i’m pretty sure he was still at f.Memphis when the hiring of Pete Newman took place (ex kanakuk staffer hired by f.Memphis while awaiting trial for child sex abuse). Now to Robert Lewis. He literally wrote the book on gender roles in marriage. It’s called “Rocking the Roles” and it’s pretty much the guidebook for FBCLR marriage and pre-marriage classes/lifegroups. i should know. i went through it 15 years ago. boy have i learned alot since then.
Is Memphis just an extra slimy cesspool for this stuff or is this stuff going on to this extent everywhere?
@ elastigirl:
I suspect it’s the same thing that a lot of us went through via the shepherding craze of the 70s and 80s. Which is to say that it’s a disastrous experience for all concerned, and very hsrd to recover from.
elastigirl wrote:
Here’s what I know so far. I’ll probably find out more once the church “family meeting” happens in October, but no guarantees how transparent they’ll be with answers.
*It goes by the much more benign sounding name of “Family Tree” and Exodus 18:21-22 is used for its justification.
*It currently has four levels – head pastor at the top, then two intermediate levels consisting of “volunteer team leaders”, worship leaders, and volunteers and other members who are the most loyal to the church – then every other member at the bottom. My assigned leader is a master at “love bombing” to the point that he makes me uncomfortable with his hugs/high fives/questions into my life.
*The church maintains a separate listing of all members with a notation of how many church activities each is involved in, with the goal of getting those not doing anything to get involved, even if they don’t want to.
*Supposedly, the Level 3 people are supposed to call/Facebook message everyone under them once a week to ask questions/invite them to get together. Then they report to the person above them at Level 2, and the Level 2 people report to the lead pastor. Members are also to be contacted by the person above them if they miss two or more weeks of church.
As for what questions will be asked during these weekly contacts, and what information they would try to glean from them, I’m not sure, and it might vary from person to person. I’d imagine one of the questions would be, “Any sins that you want to confess?” which can obviously be used against someone.
notastepfordsheep wrote:
According to Richard Hammar, attorney for Church Law & Tax, there is an epidemic of child sexual abuse in churches. It’s the No. 1 reason churches are sued every single year.
http://www.churchlawandtax.com/web/2016/august/top-5-reasons-religious-organizations-went-to-court-in-2015.html
AnonInNC wrote:
Lord have mercy, the language I’d use if anyone pulled that on me….
elastigirl wrote:
I wasn’t asked for an answer, but having lived through a 9Marxist, heavy-Shepherding, John MacArthur-ite gulag (I mean *church*) for 8 years, I’d like to share my experience. I was a member of Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley. Attendance was tracked at church services on a clip board. Attendance at church events was tracked. Attendance at Bible Studies was tracked. Ditto Adult Sunday School.
Being in ‘violation’ of the ‘unspoken rules’ got me screamed at by the senior pastor Cliff for ‘what-was-[my]-excuse-for-missing-Bible-study?-[at-a-group-leader’s-home]’. My response to Clifford? “I was at work and in commute traffic. I’m not home in time.”
Missing church got calls about ‘not forsaking the meeting of [believers]”, even though I was sick, taking care of someone who was sick, out of town at a scheduled event.
Everything about you is discussed by the pastors/elders. It’s totally cultish.
In classes like Adult Sunday School a clipboard is passed around with an attendance roster. At a Bible study a small group leader reports back to the pastors/elders who did/didn’t attend. At church services the church secretary and others (including me)
were asked to take attendance. Even kids’ attendance was taken. All sheets were turned in.
I had to go to the nursery and baby rooms to take attendance. Sigh. I wish I had known better. I was told it was because the pastors/elders ‘cared’. Wrong ‘c’ word. It’s cultish and controlling.
At Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley, like all abusive relationships, you didn’t know ‘the rules’ until you had ‘violated’ them.
I told everybody here that I got a call from the Chairman of the Elder Board that they’d had a meeting and discussed that I was “too lavish” for bringing bbq beef brisket to a church fellowship meal…some 10 pounds of it. It was eaten in record time. The German butcher gave me a 50% discount for buying a whole brisket…but I got “disciplined”. Just rude and controlling. Not an ounce of gratitude. Whom do they think they are. Low-class and totally not funny.
Pastors/elders decide the rules. They, their inner circle of friends, family members, favorite felons…are exempt from the rules.
Calls to your home, questioning, Thought Reform techniques, interrogations, 2 or more elders meeting with you and demanding ‘answers’, being screamed at, and on and on.
Nah. Then you’re “bringing an accusation against an elder without cause” as Clifford was fond of saying to people. And you haven’t ‘obeyed’ and ‘submitted’ to your elders ‘in all things’. And it’s a tough job to scream at the saints, and lie about them, and threaten them but somebody has to do it and the pastors/elders/screamers/threateners will ‘give an account to God’ for all of this super, super hard work on our behalfs.
I just think they’ll give an account alright, and I don’t expect it will be as pleasant as they do.
But what do I know? I don’t have a $299 diploma mill *Ph.D.* to my name from Faith Bible College in Independence, Missouri, like Clifford has. And has H.U.G. would say: I don’t have the ‘right’ parts.
numo wrote:
Indeed.
Some astute Christian here – can’t remember if it was one of the M’s or someone else – said that there’s only ONE mark of a healthy Biblical church — LOVE. And that doesn’t even land on the radar.
I’d like to add that tracking church attendance is very informal at this point. It’s based on “Hey, I didn’t see you at church last Sunday, where were you?” It might become more formalized after this new system gets put into place; after all there have been weeks that I’ve been there, left immediately afterward, and people didn’t even know I was there.
The pastor has been increasingly trying to pry into my life, asking me about the conventions I attend, and worse – he asked about who I’m voting for in the election (to which I answered with Luigi from the Mario Bros. video games) and then he asked who my PARENTS were voting for – which is completely none of his business. I probably divulged too much information to him already regarding some of my other interests, but that was before these reg flags started showing up. I’ve since learned to keep my mouth shut or supply him with vague, general answers.
I can only imagine the people higher up in the “family tree” hierarchy will be asking the same sort of things that is really none of their business.
My parents, by the way, also think this is creepy, controlling, and cult-like.
@ AnonInNC:
Thing is, if they just had love and joy and peace and kindness and goodness and above all Jesus, they wouldn’t worry about protecting their numbers and controlling people’s time, they wouldn’t have to be concerned over keeping tabs on parishioners, they’d just be glad to see people each week and then glad to see them go if they felt more comfortable elsewhere, they’d be glad for people to serve each other, and if people didn’t show up for this or that bit of service opportunity, they really wouldn’t care.
But if all you have is paranoia and a lust for power and a compulsion to control because it makes you feel important and worthy, you have nothing at all, and in your jealousy, you’ll try to scratch and claw away the joy that you don’t have away from others.
@ razorbackSally:
Thanks for laying the connections out.
An awful lot of this seems to come down to nepotism.
@ razorbackSally:
Thanks. It’s a good point you make about neither being in the SBC. I believe there was originally one church that split? Was that back in the Zane Hodges/John MacArthur dispute? So much has gone on for me since then that I cannot remember…Or maybe I’m thinking about the school splitting of from the church.
AnonInNC wrote:
They love that stuff, those sentimental euphemisms that are just plain trite and in bad taste and utterly stupid. At my controlling cult, the new change they rolled out when things took an ugly and demonic turn was “Circle of Friends”, as in “Submit to pastor, trust him, remove any and all checks on him, we don’t need those worldly checks and balances, why we’re all just a circle of friends!” Church lasted two brutal years after that and imploded.
Law Prof wrote:
In recent history, Totalitarian Secret Police never have an official name like “Homeland Security” or “Internal Security”; they usually have some neutral bureaucratic acronym (OGPU, NKVD, AVO, KGB, FSB) or a Mom & Apple Pie name (“Encourages of Virtue”, “Preventers of Vice”, “Guardians”) that sounds so Sweet and Innocent and Wholesome nobody could ever be against it.
Law Prof wrote:
I’ve seen what happens when “I’m Miserable, so I’ll make sure Everyone is Just As Miserable as Me!” goes down. It isn’t pretty.
Velour wrote:
With pastors/Elders, assume EVERY PhD is Honorary/phony until proven otherwise.
AnonInNC wrote:
Just like Scientology Auditing….
numo wrote:
I wasn’t involved very deep at all, and the damage is still there after 40 years.
You know, I got tired of the Christianese term “Fellowship” to describe a we’re-not-really-one-of-those-churches some 40 years ago.
As I did the use of “Fellowship” as a verb. As in the lyric of an early CCM piece from that period: “Fellowshipping with the LORD…”
For that matter, I never could understand why so many at the time ALWAYS used the word “LORD” to refer to God or Jesus. Sometimes actually pronounced with all-caps and multiple “O”s. I mean, it was the ONLY word they ever used.
Maybe I’ve just become allergic to Christianese.
All too often it goes well beyond a Technical Language (jargon used for precision by a profession) and into a Mystery Language (jargon used to separate the Illuminati from the sheeple in a game of one-upmanship).
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
My former cult was known as New Life Fellowship in New Jersey. In Austin, it went by Emmaus Christian Fellowship. There are ex-members from decades back who still call it the Fellowship. To this day, when I want to creep my husband out, I refer to people getting together to visit as “fellowshipping.” It works every time. 🙂
I find it especially ironic that churches use the phrase “worship corporately.” It’s like they’re not even trying to hide the fact that they’re essentially being run like Fortune 500 corporations with pastor CEO’s and an unhealthy focus on keeping “clients” in, getting new “clients,” and cash flowing in.
AnonInNC wrote:
Of course, they mean worshiping all together, as a corporate body, rather than being a corporation, but I get your drift, they are so often run like corporations with:
Clever marketing strategies,
An emphasis on logos and branding and doing whatever it takes to increase market share,
The establishment of hierarchies and the jockeying of the power-hungry for positions and greater influence and responsibility,
The recruitment of “rainmaker” execs from other organizations who get fancy perks and superstar treatment,
The devotion to itinerant book writing speaker gurus who get paid fat honoraria to teach the rank-and-file how to recruit more, sell more,
The resources devoted to conferences with hot shots and big names who will teach you a better way and how to be a team player and add value to the system,
The mind-numbing trendiness and thought-stopping catch phrases that get picked up within the organizations and become a way of identifying who’s “in” and who’s “out”,
The brutal way that those who think differently from the execs and luminaries and power brokers get treated when they speak up or blow the whistle.
For people who harp about doing it the “Gospel Way”, it seems that they particularly hate the way of the true Gospel and love the way of the world.
What a bunch of liars.
@ Law Prof:
All they need to do now is go public and sell stock…
@Law Prof
We were at Fellowship for years and you list many of the reasons my teens got out of the youth group. Soon after we all left the church. They could see right through what most adults never discover. It’s a sham. They try to sell you on their curriculums and programs but rarely pray or teach scripture.
Muff Potter wrote:
And the worse they treat their Tithing Units, the more “INVEST NOW — THE MONEY WILL COME IN IN BUCKETS!” Hot Stock Tips for them will hit my spam filters.
Law Prof wrote:
“Gospel”-anything has become duckspeak — Party Line recited without engaging any neuron above the brainstem. Stimulus/Response, like Pavlov’s dogs.
@ Nancy2:
Oh, my goodness, I just love your stories!
@ AnonInNC:
Good grief! This is so intrusive and inappropriate, a building up of power in the “leadership.”
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
It’s so unethical. In the real world people don’t get hired for faking degrees and get fired when it’s discovered, including heads of companies.
These guys are such frauds.
My ex-pastor’s teaching credential is non-existent according to the state agency and they’ve never credentialed anyone with his name. So much for all of his stories to us about taking classes to become a teacher etc. Lie upon lie…about everything.
Several of us have vetted my ex-pastor.
Law Prof wrote:
Standing ovation!