"I do what I do because it is the right thing to do. I am a warrior, and it is the way of the warrior to fight superior odds." Paul Watson link
This is Post 1/2 for 9/15
Over the last few years, a commenter (who shall remain anonymous), with some ties to SBTS, has provided us with his/her insights into the various goings on at the seminary and college. We have always enjoyed these comments since we have noticed that the observations, seemed to be right on the money as time has gone on. When we received this latest email, we found the allegations rather compelling and decided to share it with our readers.
Does this line up with the facts? You all tell us.
Don't think for a second that Lambert manipulated Mohler into firing Johnson. Mohler calls the shots on that campus. Heath knows where his bread is buttered and did what the boss man wanted.
Mohler wanted Johnson out ten years ago. That's why he hired Stuart Scott. However, Scott failed get a PhD. SACS would not maintain SBTS' accreditation if they forced Johnson out wrongfully and promoted a person without a PhD into department chair. Mohler began to hint toward accepting that, but the trustees were not about to let the flagship seminary of the SBC become unaccredited. They actually gave Johnson the endowed chair at this time.
Mohler gave up on Scott and fingered Lambert for the job. Lambert started getting publicity in Towers and at conferences, and gave Mohler him a job on campus. When Lambert was ready, Mohler revoked tenure and waited a couple more years to give plausible deniability to the scheme.
Nobody who still wants to maintain ties to that institution will dare say it. That's why they blame Heath Lambert. Not that Lambert is innocent, but the price of being golden child is that he can be made scapegoat in an instant if Mohler needs to do so. As payoff, Lambert will likely get the endowed chair and a raise unless there is some string attached to the money.
In the words of Frank Drebin – Please disperse. Nothing to see here!
Silver!
Well, I understand what the problem is here: you’re all looking for the perfect church.
What I would say is, if you ever find the perfect church, don’t join it – you’ll spoil it.
Yours sincerely,
Arnold Smartarse
Now that sounds just like Mohler playing the long game! He hadn’t lost his evil grip at all.
Casting the blustery little man, Heath, was perfect. He’s the guy everyone can hate. And he paid sufficient praise and honor upon Mohler.
This is why tenure needs to be defended at all costs. The trustees of SBTS failed when tenure was revoked. While I respect the need for some theological criteria at a seminary ( need to affirm a basic creed, for example) no tenure at all is a recipt for abuse by the leader…
Interesting. Especially the revoke tenure, with a goal towards dumping someone in a couple years (pretty close to that 3 years of lies timeline for newcal church takeovers no?).
I don’t know enough about any of the parties, but that Lambert person does not seem to have adequate credentials to be a department head to me.
The scenario leaves room for deniability, but is completely in line with past workings in the SBC. If anyone thinks Albert isn't a patient calculating man, then they haven't paid attention to the Calvinist takeover or even the fundementalist/conservative takeover, which serves as the model for reshaping of denomination. Calculating and shrewd, not Christlike but shrewd. Good news is there are plenty of narrative examples in the OT, so he can claim to be biblical in his approach, lmao.
If this is the way it works, then it’s absolutely evil and Al Mohler is given over to evil, not a person to be considered for anything but an example for public censure like Paul often did to those who are persecutors of the church. Satan works behind the scenes to maneuver and get what he wants—Jesus was direct and confronted things in the open.
If this is true, the fruits of people like Mohler have a lot in common with one of those parties and are very much unlike the other. I’ll leave you to guess which is which.
Now that is the type of evangelical angling I remember, this is the rule, not the exception. The takeovers, the constant lying, the manipulation and gutting of people. I have personally seen it, people taken out just for spite or political reasons, and for the most honorable reason – money. It's all done in the love of Jesus, but there is a brutality and calculated viciousness to it.
Sadly, this is totally believable, even if it is not true. However, if Lambert gets the endowed chair, he will be tainted by the way he got it, and I have to cling to the hope that it would actually matter to someone in the SBC. Especially the Trustees.
Assuming a minimal amount of effort, how can someone (Stuart Scott) fail to get a Ph.D. from SBTS if Mohler wants him to get a Ph.D.? That is a serious question.
Reading this I feel like I need a shower. And people wonder why folks hate the SBC. Even here in hardcore East Texas, once a stronghold of the SBC, more and more people of all ages are questioning why the Baptists, and people are either leaving the denomination for the nondenominational world, or just staying home on Sunday. As a former Baptist deacon recently told me – "It seems Jesus doesn't mind if I fish on Sundays."
Gram3 wrote:
I wondered that also?
I wondered the same.
@ Gram3:
Lea wrote:
That’s really a thing? It wasn’t just us? I know Dever has warned against rushing it, but prescribing 3 years? That’s creepy.
And that was exactly the timeline at our church. ‘Cept it failed.
Ted wrote:
Well, we thought a magic alarm clock went off at 5 years instead of 3. Changes along the way, sure, but at 5 years there was a blatant and in-your-face insult to the people who had made the church what it was before the takeover. No mistaking it. And it only got worse.
Lydia wrote:
It’s called ABD — All But Dissertation. That dang dissertation separates the men from the boys and the women from the girls. 😀
@ Catholic Gate-Crasher:
Tell me about it. 😉
@ Ted:
I read 3 to 5. And it’s a very subtle process. Quiet Revolution written by Ernest Risinger gives a bit of an outline.
@ mitch:
Great comment. Mahler seems to have something like Stalin had with his Cult of Personality minions surrounding him. Everyone seems scared to death of him. So it’s constant praise and adoration all the time. Even people who leave won’t say anything.
Gram3 wrote:
The anonymous commenter wanted me to tell you this.
“i was led to believe Stuart Scott didn’t want to get a PhD”
@ dee:
I see. Thank you Dee and Anonymous commenter.
OK, I’m prejudiced, but that’s because I, a mental health consumer, get my mental health care from licensed psychologists and psychiatrists. That’s because my insurance won’t cover it otherwise and I’m not independently wealthy.
So now that you know my bias up front, let me tell you that I find Heath Lambert’s ACBC to be scary. I checked earlier this week to see if the counselors in my state (Arizona) had any sort of state licensing, and none of them did. (BTW, ACBC’s website is awful for trying to figure out where counselors are. I can’t help but believe this is absolutely intentional.) So if your ACBC counselor completely messes up, you have nowhere to go to complain and maybe get their license to practice yanked.
On top of that, Lambert has put out this “95 Theses,” which says, in part, the Bible is sufficient for counseling. Well, no, it’s not sufficient. With all due respect, the writers of the Bible didn’t know about mental illness and brain/body issues like we do today (and we’re just scraping the surface when it comes to what we know about the mind). This doesn’t mean spiritual matters can’t play a part in a wholistic answer to a person’s mental health issues, but “Biblical counseling” is not going to get to the heart of paranoid schizophrenia or chronic major depression.
Warren Throckmorton has more to say about this on his blog and I recommend people go there and read what he’s written recently. It’s very thoughtful but also challenging to Lambert and the ACBC.
As for the SBTS thing, i’m so not surprised. Just not.
This explanation makes absolute sense to me, but I don’t think this is just about Johnson. I think this is a tiny piece of a much larger move by the “imminent theologians”. It would be interesting to know what part Brunson played in all of this as it seems Lambert may play a larger role at FBC than his job title indicates.
I think it may be time to look at each of these odd isolated stories as part of a bigger movement. If you look closely enough, I think you will see that they are working what would seem like mutually excludive angles through their various associates. Another disturbing trend that I think fits into the overall strategy is guys taking on 2, 3, and 4 roles when any one of those roles is more than a full time job if done properly and not as just as an authoritative figurehead. As I’m writing this, it is becoming more obvious that he’s getting all his pieces in place.
Lea wrote:
But he is Absolutely Utterly Loyal to the Regime, and that is all that matters.
Lydia wrote:
“Just like Comrade Kim Jong-Un, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!”.
Gram3 wrote:
“On the day Ernst Rohm died
A voice rang out
From the rolling Bavarian hills:
‘You can’t stop me now,
I’m STRONG,
Stronger than your law’…”
— Al Stewart, “The First Day of June 1934”
Lydia wrote:
I’ll have to get Quiet Revolution (used, of course). Mark Dever’s book The Deliberate Church also has a lot of that, more so than his Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, which I found underwhelming. When I was on the diaconate in was that one (Nine Marks) that we read, not knowing where it was leading. Fortunately, the effort failed but it has been devisive.
What Happened wrote:
Smart observation.
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes wrote:
This is important.
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes wrote:
Doesn’t the Bible say when someone is sick to anoint him with oil? Does that mean we should forgo medical care and invest in Crisco?
What Happened wrote:
I have been wondering about this myself. As far as I know, and we did a number of stories on him and his lawsuit against Tom Rich-Mac lost-Mac Brunson was not a Calvinist. Maybe he is doing what CJ Mahaney did. he saw the direction things were going on and started throwing money at the big cheeses. I wonder if Brunson is now a *real* Christian which would mean being a Calvinist?
This is what R Albert Mahler wrote about Scripture and Conselling in 2014.
https://www.biblicalcounselingcoalition.org/2014/10/21/scripture-and-counseling-foreword-by-dr-r-albert-mohler-jr/
Mahler = Mohler
And here is an announcement about a new appointment in Biblical Counselling at Boyce, that meets the approval of Mr Mohler.
“Rogers is completing his Ph.D. in biblical counseling at Southern Seminary, after earning his M.Div. and master of arts in biblical counseling from The Master’s Seminary in Sun Valley, California, in 2006. He is also a fellow and board member with the Association of Certified Biblical Counselors (ACBC) and previously served in several ministry positions, including as pastor of soul care at College Park Church in Indianapolis, Indiana.
“One of our most important programs at Southern Seminary and Boyce College is biblical counseling,” Mohler said. “Andrew Rogers will bring outstanding leadership to the Boyce College program, preparing a new generation of young people to counsel on the basis of the unqualified truthfulness, authority, and sufficiency of Scripture. Rogers comes with a long tenure of experience in biblical counseling and is a leader in the field. We eagerly look forward to him joining the Boyce College faculty.”
http://news.sbts.edu/2017/06/19/boyce-college-adds-old-testament-biblical-counseling-professors/
Here’s an interesting comment on Heath Lambert. As the head honcho at ACBC, he publishes a weekly podcast on iTunes entitled “Truth in Love”.
His May 14th episode is entitled “Christians and Masturbation”. In this episode he tells everyone that masturbation is a sin for sure, and no one should ever do it. Not teenagers, not even married service members serving our country should masturbate as a way to relieve their sexual desires for their mate while they are away.
And I kid you not, he quoted the “..if your hand offendeth thee…” scripture. I would have stayed away from that one, in the context of masturbation.
I would always be wary of a hot-shot seminarian who thinks he knows enough about human psychology and sexuality to tell everyone, everywhere, in every situation, that if they masturbate they are sinning against God.
Lowlandseer wrote:
And what kind of destruction will these “pastors” bring in their “counseling”?
Lowlandseer wrote:
I pretty much disagree with the entirety of this.
Also, is mohler truly going to claim he doesn’t have any ‘self esteem’?
@ TR:
Lol! He really used that scripture? Ok, If your thoughts offend……get a lobotomy?
@ Ted:
Some parts of it are free online. SBC Founders used to have it on their site. I would check that out.
Lowlandseer wrote:
Wait, is that John MacArthur’s school?
And wasn’t MacArthur’s teaching on mental illness vs the Bible implicated in some lawsuit or perhaps some depressed person’s suicide?
Please pardon me if I have muddled some facts, and please feel free to provide the correct facts if my memory is not working correctly today.
Lowlandseer wrote (quoting Mr Mohler):
An interesting quote.
In that particular evangelical echo-chamber, wherein a limited circle of people award each other degrees and speaking slots, I really have to wonder what that “long tenure of experience” is actually worth.
Is, say, ten years of experience really ten years of accumulated experience, or just the same four months of experience thirty times over?
Does “leading the field” involve having the wisdom and humility to solve a wide range of problems, or just becoming more and more practiced at giving the same answers to every problem?
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
I was driving through farm country and saw a farmer who was out standing in his field.
refugee wrote:
Yes, that is John MacArthur’s school.
And, no, Master’s Seminary wasn’t sued. It was Grace Community Church itself, for an incident in 1979:
http://www.nytimes.com/1985/05/20/us/church-sued-over-a-suicide-says-it-will-change-training.html
Note, the case was dropped, but MacArthur said they’d change their system. I’m cynical enough to believe the “change” was that clients had to first sign a statement saying they couldn’t bring a lawsuit, a la Scientology.
Well, and then I did a bit more research, and it’s a bit sicker than I thought.
*snip*
http://articles.latimes.com/1989-04-04/news/mn-952_1_supreme-court
I don’t have the ability to see if this is still good law in the state of California. But I suspect, due to church-state separation issues, it still is. That being the case, I would absolutely not recommend church counseling, because there’s no way to hold people accountable when they do something wrong. And, keep in mind, at least in Arizona, none of the ACBC’s approved “counselors” hold a state license of any sort. I suspect that’s the case in pretty much every other state.
Whoa! That’s the same Stuart Scott that teaches that husbands should “do whatever is necessary” to correct their wives and doesn’t believe that the Holy Spirit still speaks to believers today? THIS is the guy they wanted to train the next generation of pastors who will influence hundreds of lives? He actually wrote in his book that wives were like wayward sheep who needed regular correction from their shepherd (husband).
If anyone wants the reference, here’s the actual quotes:
https://www.amazon.com/review/R1OXXWE2K3XIBU/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1885904312
@ Avid Reader:
Thank you for filling us in on Scott’s beliefs.
@ TR:
I am hearing about this from more and more people.
Lowlandseer wrote:
There is some scary stuff in there.
“Part of the biblical counseling ministry of the church proceeds from the pulpit as church members corporately submit themselves to the Word of God.”
The pulpit is now synonymous with the Word of God?
This goes with a comment I made on a different thread.
Here is the link:
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2017/09/13/heath-lambert-lambasts-eric-johnson-and-al-mohler-fires-him/#comment-339786
bonnie knox wrote:
And nobody can deny.
dee wrote:
Sincere apologies if this has already been mentioned.
Stuart Scott and Heath Lambert are Co-Editors and Contributors of Counseling the Hard Cases: Illustrating the Sufficiency of God’s Resources in Scripture”. The contributors do include two M.D.s and a Psy.D. The other contributors do not have credentials or licenses. However it is interesting that the chapter on Bipolar Disorder was not written by a Psychiatrist, and Bipolar is treated medically. Guess who wrote the chapter on Post-partum Depression. Heath Lambert! Who else but a man who is not trained could possibly know more about it? Was there no female psychologist or psychiatrist available to write it? Stuart Scott, who has a D.Min., wrote the chapter on Dissociative Identity Disorder, so there is hope yet for Nick, Roger, Ick, Nice, Satin, and friends!
The book is published by B&H Academic, so I suppose that is what is being taught to the Pastor Pups at our SBC seminaries. Are the Trustees paying any attention at all to what the students are being taught? The pewpeons deserve to know and need to know what they are paying for and are likely to encounter when they or their families seek counseling. It is also possible that the book is being used in churches for lay counseling training, but I don’t know.
Avid Reader wrote:
Does “whatever is necessary” include fists?
If true, and sounds like it is, it’s almost Machiavellian.
The most recent damage wrought by a relative of mine who is an ACBC biblical counselor was to advise a family friend to stay in her abusive (not physical, yet anyway, but certainly psychological — massive control obsession) marriage.
As far as comments about Master’s Seminary and college training and graduates not believing the Holy Spirit speaks today, remember that MacArthur is not only a literalist biblicist but also a cessationist. I don’t think much good comes of that place or that man, but you have to give them points for being consistent.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
According to the reviewer, Scott emphatically teaches against physical enforcement of the husband’s will. So there’s that, at least.
To clarify, Stuart Scott’s very brief mention—that husbands shouldn’t physically harm their wives—does NOT make up for how he goes on and on and on and on about how wives are wayward lambs who need regular correction from their husbands to keep from straying.
Read between the lines—Stuart’s ACTUAL words were telling husband to “do whatever is necessary” to correct their wives as long as they remember that their “authority stops short of physically abusing our wives.”
Stops short of? God help us—this is the man training the next generation of pastors!
@ Muslin, fka Dee Holmes:
Thank you for the information!
Avid Reader wrote:
Gross!!!
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes wrote:
I completely agree with this.
I will say, I think it is often very hard to find fault in cases of suicide. (I’m not necessarily speaking legally here) I think you can do things that absolutely don’t help/hurt, but it is so complicated you can’t know if ‘the right actions’ would have done anything either.
Avid Reader wrote:
And counselors, apparently. How is it even POSSIBLE for women to get a fair hearing/treatment from someone like this???
Look, whether or not you agree with the decision to fire Eric Johnson, does the writer of the email have any actual, you know, evidence that this is the case? Looks like a bunch of hearsay to me.
Maybe Johnson shouldn’t have been let go. Maybe it was political. But where’s the actual documentable evidence? Without it, this just comes off as slander.
Avid Reader wrote:
Yes, that is what I meant by “there’s that, at least.” It is pathetic, but it is necessary because some men have to be explicitly instructed that their authority is restricted.
Avid Reader wrote:
“But I say to you that whoever visualizes abusing their wife physically has already committed abuse in his heart.” – Jesus
I don’t have inside knowledge of what went on recently. But this story about 10 years ago is consistent with what I heard about 10 years ago. I had heard Eric was being threatened with being fire. He was not respected by the students and others in the program because, as I understood it, he would not go wholeheartedly for “biblical counseling”. I knew Eric and heard the story that Mohler had changed his mind back then and saw some of the abuses going on in “biblical counseling” at his seminary and thought then, 10 years ago, they needed Eric.
As we see in many other areas brought to light by WW, Mohler can not be trusted.
I knew Eric back 10 years ago. You will never meet a more humble caring person than Eric Johnson. He is thoroughly a good evangelical and Biblical person. I could recommend someone needing counseling going to Eric. But I would never recommend anyone go to a person for counseling who went to Southern Seminary.
ken wrote:
I guess he doesn’t care about abuse anymore? Hm.
I am reading the CT article and
1. how does ‘biblical counseling’ even have 6 graduate degree tracks? Kind of curious what they are.
2. Moore said ““It will mean moving beyond the clinical professionalism of what historically has been dubbed ‘pastoral care’ in the therapeutic guild, but it will mean recovering true ‘pastoral care’ as defined by the Scriptures.”
Yes, professionalism is terrible. And ACTUAL ‘pastoral care’ is terrible. Now I guess we have ‘biblical’ pastoral care? Do these people even listen to themselves? Sheesh.
It is interesting to note that, according to Christianity Today, the Trustees at SBTS
So, in order to be a student or faculty of good standing (i.e., continued enrollment or employment), one must sign the Nashville Statement as well as the others, but NOT, it should be noted, the Nicene Creed; ESS is still okay.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2017/september-web-only/johnson-southern-biblical-counseling-christian-psychology.html?start=2
@ Burwell:
I saw that too about adopting the Nashville statement.
I do hope somebody stands up and says ‘no’ on this.
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes wrote:
I’m pretty certain that unless ‘biblical counselors’ already have state licenses before they’re trained at Master’s or wherever, they’re not qualified to be licensed. These counselors have no oversight, no accountability, no malpractice insurance, no HIPAA restrictions, and no mandatory reporting requirements because most of them are not formally ordained. Best to avoid them and get help from a state licensed practitioner who is a Christian. I’ve seen some people’s lives seriously and irreversibly damaged as a result of ‘counseling’ from TMU/TMS grads.
@ Burwell:
Thanks for highlighting that. If the Trustees of SBTS in fact do make the Nashville Statement dogma for SBTS — and I am certain that they will — it will be more evidence that the Trustees of SBC entities are not primarily concerned with fidelity to the written word of God but *are* committed to extra-biblical pronouncements that sound nothing like Jesus and certainly nothing remotely like Baptists. I say that as an inerrantist and lifelong SBC conservative.
As you pointed out, these Trustees and the ones before them were — and still are — perfectly happy to have on the faculty men who proclaim the absurd doctrine that the Eternal Son ***who gave his life to save them*** is a subordinate in the Trinity. Heresy that they dress up and proclaim orthodox. It is sickening, and moreso to people like me who are conservative.
Lea wrote:
I think it was C.S. Lewis who said something about men with chests. If, by chance, a Trustee stood up to the others, what would happen? He would be kicked out of the Cool Guys Club into the outer darkness of insignificance with the rest of us. Power is powerfully addictive.
I suppose I’m not surprised at the actions of Mohler in this case. His cronies at Ligonier have done worse that this over the years. I wish the best for Johnson and while not excusing SBTS’s underhanded tactics, wonder if he will have a better future than if he’d stayed at SBTS, and environment that would continually vex the spirit of anyone who wanted to grow in their understanding of the human psyche and soul.
As someone who has some personal experience with the Christian counseling programs offered by Reformed Theological Seminary, I wonder if there are forces afoot at that institution to move their programs toward biblical counseling, considering how chummy Duncan and Mohler are. That IMO would be tragic.
Gram3 wrote:
Yes. I think it’s one of those things where if it’s only one, they get kicked out. What if it’s two? 10? 50? 1000? If you kick too many people out of your club, you no longer have a club. Christianity shouldn’t be about staying in the clubhouse.
BTW, roaming on twitter and relevant to the discussion (maybe it was in the other thread) about how BC’s don’t care about results…some guy tweated this:
!!!!!!!!!!!
FYI – Lambert was just named Branson’s co-pastor and “successor” at FBC Jacksonville.