So here’s the plan. Another “apostle” has given his troops their marching orders.
Address dissension and “slander” from the pulpit.
Discourage the sheep from reading the blogs.
Use the Keller/Powlison Article.
I’ll help. I’ve posted the article below. You’re welcome.
By the way, when you receive the article below, remind the person handing it to you that the blogs are run by human beings. Christian human beings. You might want to ask them if they have tried to contact me. I’ve posted my phone number on here and survivors many times. My email address is on the “about us” page, and when I respond to an email, my phone number is in my sig file. Based on what SGM teaches about gossip and slander, why is it ok for them to talk about me without talking to me?
Ask your pastor.
Should You Pass on Bad Reports?
by Tim Keller & David Powlison
One obvious genius of the internet is that it’s “viral.” Information explodes to the whole world. The old neighborhood grapevine and the postal service seem like ox-carts in a speed-of-light universe. (Do twenty-somethings even know what those antiquities once were? In the old days, people had to talk to each other or stick a stamp on an envelope.) Instantaneous transmission produces some wonderfully good things. Truth, like joy, is infectious. A great idea feeds into a million inboxes. But it also produces some disastrous evils. Lies, rumors, and disinformation travel just as far and just as fast.
So what should you do when you hear “bad reports” about a person or church or ministry? We want to offer a few thoughts on how to remain constructive. To paraphrase Ephesians 4:29, “Let no unwholesome words come out of your computer, but only what is constructive, in order to meet the need of the moment, that what you communicate will give grace to everyone who ever reads it.” That Greek word translated “unwholesome” is sapros. It means something that is inedible, either devoid of nutritional value or rotten and even poisonous. It applies to thorny briars or to fish or fruit that’s gone bad. At best, it’s of no benefit to anyone. At worst, it’s sickening and destructive. Consider three things in how to stay constructive.
What Does James Say about Passing Along Bad Reports?
Humble yourselves before the Lord.
Brothers, don’t slander or attack one another.
(James 4:10-11)
The verb “slander” simply means to “speak against” (Gk. kata-lalein). It is not necessarily a false report, just an “against-report.” The intent is to belittle another. To pour out contempt. To mock. To hurt. To harm. To destroy. To rejoice in purported evil. This can’t mean simple disagreement with ideas—that would mean that we could never have a debate over a point. This isn’t respectful disagreement with ideas. James warns against attacking a person’s motives and character, so that the listeners’ respect and love for the person is undermined. “As the north wind brings rain, so slander brings angry looks” (Prov. 25:23). Everybody gets upset at somebody else: slanderer, slanderee, slander-hearer.
The link of slander to pride in James 4:10 shows that slander is not the humble evaluation of error or fault, which we must constantly be doing. Rather, in slander the speaker speaks as if he never would do the same thing himself. It acts self-righteous and superior toward one’s obviously idiotic inferiors. Non-slanderous evaluation is fair-minded, constructive, gentle, guarded, and always demonstrates that speakers sense how much they share the same frailty, humanity, and sinful nature with the one being criticized. It shows a profound awareness of your own sin. It is never “against-speaking.”
James 5:9 adds a nuance: “Don’t grumble against one another.” Literally, it means don’t moan and groan and roll your eyes. This refers to a kind of against-speaking that is not as specific as a focused slander or attack. It hints at others flaws, not only with words, but by body language and tone. In print, such attitudes are communicated by innuendo, guilt by association, sneering, pejorative vocabulary. In person, it means shaking your head, rolling your eyes, and re-enforcing the erosion of love and respect for someone else. For example, “You know how they do things around here. Yadda, yadda. What do you expect?” Such a “groan” accomplishes the same thing as outright slander. It brings “angry looks” to all concerned. Passing on negative stuff always undermines love and respect. It’s never nourishing, never constructive, never timely, never grace-giving.
What Does the Book of Proverbs Say about Receiving Bad Reports?
He who covers over an offense promotes love,
but whoever repeats the matter separates close friends.
(Proverbs 17:9)
The first thing to do when hearing or seeing something negative is to seek to “cover” the offense rather than speak about it to others. That is, rather than let a bad report “pass in” to your heart as truth, and then get “passed along” to others, you should seek to keep the matter from destroying your love and regard for a person. How?
Start by remembering your own sinfulness. “All a man’s ways seem innocent to him, but motives are weighed by the Lord” (Prov. 16:2). To know this automatically keeps you from being too sure of your position and of speaking too strongly against people that you hear about or people on the other side of a conflict. You intuitively realize that you may not be seeing things right. Your motives are never as pure as you think they are. To know this acts to keep you from being too sure of the facts, too sure of your position, and of speaking too quickly and too negatively about other people. Knowing your own sinfulness helps you not make snap judgments that take what you hear too seriously.
When you remember your sinfulness, remember God’s mercies. “Love covers all offenses” (Prov. 10:12). The God who is love has covered all your offenses. He knows everything about you (and the whole story about that other person). He has chosen to forgive you, and life-saving mercy cost Jesus his life. He could write you up with a 100% True Bad Report, but he has chosen to bury your sins in the depths of the ocean. That makes the life and death difference. If your sins are not buried in the ocean of his mercy, then you will be justly exposed and will justly perish. But when you’ve known mercy, then even when you hear report of grievous evil, an instinct toward mercy should arise within you. To savor the tasty morsels of gossip and bad reports is very different from grieving, caring, and wishing nothing less than the mercies of Christ upon all involved. And most bad reports are much more trivial. They are the stuff of busybodies and gossips going “tut-tut-tut.”
Then remember that there is always another side. “The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him” (Prov. 18:17). You never have all the facts. And you never have all the facts you need all at once. You are never in a position to see the whole picture, and therefore when you hear the first report, you should assume you have far too little information to draw an immediate conclusion. What you’ve heard from someone else is only “hear-say” evidence. It has no standing or validity unless it is confirmed in other ways.
So when you hear a negative report about another, you must keep it from passing into your heart as though it were true. If you pass judgment based on hear-say, you are a fool. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t check out the facts. Go to the person. Hear other witnesses. If you’re far away from the scene, wait for more of the story to come out. Suspend judgment. Don’t get panicked or stampeded by mob-psychology and rumors. Be content not to know many things. You don’t need to have an opinion about everything and everyone.
Third, what should you do if you are close enough to the situation to be involved AND you think the injustice or matter is too great or grievous for you to ignore? For starters, notice that you only really need to know something if it touches your sphere of life and relationships. In that case, you should do what will help you to express God’s call upon you to speak Ephesians 4:29 words of wise love.
In Derek Kidner’s commentary on Prov. 25:7–10, he writes that when you think someone has done wrong you should remember, “One seldom knows the full facts (v.8) and one’s motives in spreading a story are seldom as pure as one pretends (v.10). To run to the law or to the neighbors is usually to run away from the duty of personal relationship.” See Christ’s clinching comment in Matthew 18:15: “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.” In short, if you feel the problem is too great and you can’t keep it from destroying your regard for the person, you must go personally before you go to anyone else.
When Should You Go?
Galatians 6:1 says we are to go when a person is caught in a trespass. That means there should be some kind of “pattern” or the unmistakeable exposure of a wrong. Don’t go the first time you hear a bad report about someone doing wrong. As we said above, there’s another side to most stories, and our motives are never totally pure when we get indignant. Go if the person seems caught—that is, trapped or stuck in a habit pattern of wrong behavior or falsehood.
How Should You Go?
Galatians 6:1 says we are to restore gently and in humility, bearing all the fruit of the Spirit. Beware of your own tendencies to be tempted—perhaps to the same sin, perhaps to reactive sins of self-righteousness or judgmentalism, perhaps to avoidance sins of cover-up and pretending. Galatians 6:2 goes on to say that we actually fulfill the law of Christ by bearing each other’s burdens. We become nothing less than lesser redeemers in the pattern of our Great Redeemer. Jesus in Matthew 18:15ff says we should also go persistently, and not give up in the process. Patience is one fruit of the Spirit because problems don’t always clear up quickly. There is a progression in efforts to get to the bottom of a bad report, to confirm the facts, and to work at bringing restoration.
Who Should Go?
Galatians 6 says you—plural—who are spiritual should go to the straying one. That both defines how you should go and it calls for multiple people to get involved. Similarly Matthew 18:15ff says to bring in other people if matters don’t resolve one to one. The right kind of checking out a bad report is always done in person and often will be done by involving multiple wise persons.
Why Should You Go?
In both Galatians 6 and Matthew 18 the goal is to restore the person and to re-establish sin-broken relationships. You are working to restore people both to God and to others.
Conclusion
In summary, from the Old Testament to the New Testament, the principle is this. If you hear bad reports about other Christians you must either cover it with love or go to them personally before speaking of it to any others.
* The first thing to do is to simply suspend judgment. Don’t pass on bad reports.
* The second thing to do is “cover” it in love, reminding yourself that you don’t know all about the heart of the person who may have done evil—and you know your own frailty. Don’t allow bad reports to pass into your own heart.
* The final thing to do is go and speak to them personally.
What you should never do is rush to judgment, or withdraw from loving another, or pass on the negative report to others. This is challenge enough when you’re dealing with the local grapevine or slow-moving postal service. In a world of instant world-wide communication of information it’s an even bigger challenge, because you can do bigger damage more quickly. Whether the bad report offers true information, or partial information, or disinformation, or false information—it is even more important that you exercise great discretion, and that you take pains to maximize boots-on-the-ground interpersonal relationships.
Some interesting comments followed, which can viewed by following the link here. I found these to be helpful.
“So is this a bad report on the bringers of a bad report?
I respect the vision here — a Biblical vision of turning a brother away from his sin. I reject the idea that every “bad report” is inherently sinful. The book of Galatians is, itself, a public “bad report” from Paul against those in Galatia who were defacing the Gospel — and Paul didn’t go to these guys first and say, “listen, I didn’t want to say anything in front of the whole church, and I certainly am not suggesting that you are bad guys, but is your paradigm for the inclusivity of Christ’s work excessively biased to Old-Covenant mores and boundary markers?” I think Paul’s language is markedly more aggressive and pointed than that.
I’m fairly on-record against the excesses of watch-blogging, and if that’s what this brief essay is trying to get at, so be it. But it is one thing to repudiate hyperbolic accusations for matters of secondary (or tertiary) importance, and another entirely to say that all disagreements are inherently private disagreements which need to be settled over a cup of coffee, face to face, without any regard to the public scope of the point in contention.
The proof of this lies simply in answering the question, “How does one refute or repudiate the excesses of watch-bloggers?” The way that engagement would have to unfold — as a mixture of public exposition and private mediation — seems to me to look a lot more like the multiform method of engaging error in the NT than the (if I can be forgiven for saying so) simplistic view being advanced here.”
- – - -
“Wow, someone really should have told Paul about this.”
- – - -
“A question for the question: Would people or could people, whether they’re Christian or not, honestly and truthfully say that there are heroes in the Bible who have passed on “bad reports”?”
- – - -
“ChrisB has it. The apostle Paul would have failed this test.
Chris links to 2 Tim 4, but we could also mention Philippians 4:2, where Euodia and Syntyche’s disagreement is recorded for posterity and for our edification; we might also quiz Luke on why he had to name Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5, for their names are surely not necessary to convey the warning that the passage intends.
Returning to Paul, we could mention his public shaming of the apostle Peter in Galatians 2. If it had happened in the heat of the moment, we might excuse the event, but Paul is reporting on it some time later and using it as a part of the justification of his apostolic ministry.
And, I wonder if you could take any Cretan seriously after reading Titus 2:12.
Also, what do you make of the gospel writers exposing the betrayal of Judas, the spinelessness of Peter, and the inconsistency, hypocrisy and cowardice of the entire group of disciples right through Jesus’ ministry, and even after his resurrection (see Mt 28: 17b)?
I suppose you could argue that this was not slandering Christians, since the Holy Spirit hadn’t yet come, but I can see a few holes in that line of thinking.
So the advice that Tim and David give is useful but flawed, because it relies on selective attention to New Testament teaching.”
- – - -
Back in July I posted this, which I’ve edited (I don’t want to talk about my former sgc again), and included below.
- – - -
How does one in SGM who is not a senior pastor practice Matt 18 or 1 Tim 5:20?
How do I “tell it to the church” or “rebuke an elder who persists in sin in the presence of all”?
Who is the “church” in Matt 18, and who is “all” in 1 Tim 5?
Was Jesus referring to the local ekklesia (a church that met in a home), or a regional ekklesia (such as Corinth), or the universal ekklesia (His Bride and Body)?
When Paul was instructing Timothy, exactly who and how many people were included in the “all”?
I’m not sure anyone knows.
The early church was clearly interactive-see 1 Cor 14. If this is in dispute, I’ll elaborate in another post.
In your local SGM franchise, the local CEO is firmly in charge of everything that takes place from 10 to 12. If someone gives a testimony, it is because they have been invited to do so, and have first submitted that testimony in writing. If someone has a prophetic word for the congregation, they must approach the man guarding the prophecy mic. This is clearly the antithesis of Paul’s direction in 1 Cor 14:29.
I thought that the closest thing to an interactive assembly would be this blog. SGM leaders can publicly defend themselves.
Is there a Biblical precedent for going public in such a manner? I haven’t done a recent study, but I was familiar with 3 examples.
Luke reports the dispute between Paul and Barnabas over John Mark in Acts 15:36-41. I would think that most readers would side with Paul’s assessment of John Mark, and not think too highly of him. It may be implied that the church agreed, as it is reported that Barnabas and John Mark left, while Paul and Silas were commended by the brothers to the grace of God before departing. I haven’t researched this, so that may be a stretch. Check your commentaries, gents. I will recant.
In 2 Tim 4:10, Paul makes a very harsh statement against Demas, saying that he deserted him because he is in love with the world. Ouch. Not only describing actions but assigning motive.
John speaks to Gaius in 3 John about a leader in the church named Diotrephes who desired preeminence, did not acknowledge John’s authority, would not welcome the brothers (possibly Jewish Christians or missionaries), and excommunicated those who did welcome the brothers referenced above.
Now I’m of the opinion that the writers of Scripture knew that they were writing Scripture. If I’m wrong, I think that we can all agree that God knew that they were writing Scripture, as their words are defined as “God breathed”.
I believe that Paul was later reconciled with Barnabas, John Mark, and Demas, and I haven’t researched Diotrephes and what became of him, but it’s clear God allows harsh criticism of these 4 Christian men to remain in the most widely read book in the history of the world. These men have been dead for 2000 years, and we read about them today.
So, I take a literal view of Matt 18 and 1 Tim 5, seeing God’s view of “going public” with the sins of the 4 men listed above.
Oh, and to preserve the dignity of our dear poster, Brother Cadfael
Brother Civil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brother_Cavil
Brother Cadfael (a noble character) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadfael
‘Turns out our Brother Civil is quite a nemesis.
Sorry, left something out…
The Amway speakers would all joke about the “need for sleep” and make fun of anyone falling asleep…that there would come a time when we could sleep all we wanted. Like 5years’ husband, many of these couples had driven for hours after work just to attend the Friday night session.
They would frequently address the topic of “exhaustion”, as well. Their favorite phrase was “I’d rather burn out, than rust out!” Kinda reminds you of how SGM expects EVERYONE to serve, serve, serve and to faithfully attend care group and every meeting and function sponsored.
I would opt for an alternative to burning or rusting. Howabout balance, grease the axels and recharge the batteries.
I’m with you, DB.
That’s why we didn’t make good Amway distributors.
We did make it to “silver pin” one month…but never gold.
(Sigh)
A Kindred Spirit,
Been there, done that in Amway. Everything you have shared is 100% correct!!! You and I had identical experiences in that business. Kinda reminds me of the similar stories I have been reading about SGM written by people who don’t even know each other. Incredibly, CJ and Co. are calling their testimonies slander. There’s an eerie connection between Amway and SGM. I believe someone in SGM leadership must have copied Amway’s techniques for mind control. What do you think?
Yeah, Wanda.
Kris & I have discussed the similarities between AMWAY & SGM frequently throughout the threads on the survivors’ blog. I first brought it up back in June under the “PR Machine” thread.
This is a good thread and I don’t want to get Jim and the others off-topic. I just had to share that after reading about C.J. making that statement about sleep. How ridiculous…not to mention inconsiderate! He can sleep whenever he likes…he doesn’t work a regular J-O-B! (Remember the Amway jingles about your J-O-B?)
If you want to pick it up at survivors I think Kris’ most recent comment about the “AMWAY similarity” was #188 under the “Apologies & Some Tweaking” thread. Or we could just pick it up on her current thread sometime.
Sorry Jim, continue on…
Oh, and Jim, I hope my friend “Joel” has an oppotunity to read this. (I don’t know if you two have “met” and had an opportunity to “chat.”)
Thanks for posting it again…
“I know many of us have had bad experiences while bringing observations to our SGM pastors in the past.
Please don’t forget what to expect-
Expect to see a new humility from your pastors. If confronted, they will no longer turn the tables on you, but will actually listen. It is crucial that we understand this. They will listen, appear very humble, but will change nothing. They sit in the seat of Moses, and you don’t. Humility and leadership in SGM are antithetical. A well practiced humble demeanor does not equal humility. I hate to break it to you, but the guy trying to sell you a car doesn’t really want to be your best friend.
What should you do?
When you confront your newandimprovedmorehumblethanever pastor, ask him for a response. If there is verbal repentance, ask him what active repentance looks like. Ask him to define repentance. How is one saved-faith and repentance. What does repentance mean in the context of salvation? Does it have a different meaning in interpersonal relationships?
Watch for signs of active repentance.
One more prediction…
You won’t see it.”
Kindred-
I love to chat with Joel. I think he has his hands full on survivors…
I’m criticized on a regular basis for the content and opinion of our guests-the commenters. This is odd, and usually comes from people who don’t like or don’t understand the nature of a blog.
One frequent criticism relates to “rabbit trails”. I’ve clearly stated that I don’t care if people want to talk about their dogs here.
I’m not a big fan of the “all the guys are bald” threads, but people are allowed to say what they like, within reason.
Some critics will jump on the “CJ on sleep” comments, as it’s an old view of his, which has changed.
I would only remind them that it’s impossible to keep track of CJ’s flip-flops.
Everything said here is not currently accurate. maybe some of what is said here was never accurate.
A wise reader will spit out the bones, and what is true will resonate with them.
Just heading off what you will hear if you mention the blogs to your pastor.
Happy to help…
Clarion,
In regards to your 9:55: I see what you are saying. A body of believers cannot have unity without the Holy Spirit. Without His help, bringing together so many different folks with different backgrounds can only be uniformity, at best. I think that is why so many people who don’t “fit in” have had to leave SGM. Only the Holy Spirit can bring unity to a tax collector, a Doctor, a couple of fishermen, a prostitute, and an ex-Pharisee. Can you imagine what that would have been like without the Spirit of Jesus? Christianity would have expired centuries ago!
SGM will never respond to the blogs in the manner one would expect or hope. The same way JW’s, Mormon’s, Amway enthusiasts, and every other “groupie” out there doesn’t respond to attacks on them. They turn up the volume of “we’re right and they are deceived and don’t now what they are missing”
There is certainly a mentality here that bears scrutiny. What is it that makes SOME, not all, people flock to such organizations and ministries only to come away with no identity at all, having been totally consumed and spit out by the organization? And why do others see it for what it is?
I will share something here and hope it doesn’t offend – but once I was asked to attend a pyramid business event by a friend. (I won’t say which business, but you all know the various ones out there that make people crazy sometimes) I went to make her happy since she was my friend I had no desire to be come a consultant, despite her numerous requests to do so. While there, these women were literally jumping up and down, cheering, clapping, all euphoric which reminded me of a worship service! And all I could think was “This is like a cult!” It freaked me out. I must have had that deer-caught-in the headlights look so my friend leaned over and laughed and said “I know, that’s the way I thought the first time I came too, but it really is ok.”
How much like SGM is that? We see something odd, but dismiss it over time. She did this herself, as did I with all the SGM hype. Why? What makes us turn off the radar inside our heads that is saying “something is wrong here” and stay? It is all part of the manipulation, control that happens to varying degrees. This is where I would recommend someone read one of the many excellent books on spiritual abuse, manipulation and control, authoritarian churches, etc..it really does give some of the answers as to the set up of the systems. Then you can ask yourself why you personally were drawn (or not). Identify weakenesses and become strong so it does not happen again. That is what I have been focusing on in my own life anyway for what it is worth.
SGM higher ups will not admit fault, just like the head director of a pyramid business who has profitted off it would ever suggest she might have used those under her to get where she is, or make some decisions that were not in the best interests of others to get where she is. They are so driven by some internal desire and need all else doesn’t matter. CJ and those who have profitted at the expense of the sheep under them are no different. He is driven by a need so great, he is not about to suddenly back track and admit fault because that would me he gained what he did in an ungodly manner, and then he won’t be able to enjoy it. And it is all about enjoying his idol. It is for all of us.
UNTIL the Spirit comes, and brings conviction or judgment. One or the other will come eventually because God is not mocked, so CJ and the rest of these false shepherds better be ready. He’s actually already here..they just don’t see Him.
Wow, Bree, I was just reading True Spirituality by Francis Schaeffer, and the following jumped out at me (leaped is more like it):
from p. 85 (The Fruitful Bride)
“In justification the basis is the finished work of Jesus Christ; in sanctification it is the finished work of Christ. In justification we must see, acknowledge, and act upon the fact that we cannot save ourselves. In sanctification we must see, acknowledge, and act upon the fact that we cannot live the Christian life in our own strength, or in our own goodness.
In justification, the instrument by which we receive the free gift of God is faith, which believes God as He has given us His promises in the Bible. In sanctification, the instrument by which we receive the free gift of God is faith, which believes God as He has given us His promises in the Bible. It is exactly the same thing. There is one difference between the practice of justification and sanctification. As justification deals with our guilt, and sanctification deals with the problem of the power of sin in our lives as Christians, justification is once for all, and the Christian life is moment by moment. There is a difference in that one deals with the guilt of my sins, and the other deals with the power of sin in my life.
We accept Christ as Savior at one moment and our guilt is gone on the basis of the value of the finished work of Jesus Christ. But after we become Christians, the moments proceed, the clock continues to tick; and in every moment of time, our calling is to believe God, raise the empty hands of faith, and let fruit flow out through us.”
DB Wrote: Freedom, BSG, seriously? Did you watch BSG last night? Totally blew me out of the water. One of the best episodes ever.
Me – Yep, HUGE fan, been watching since the miniseries. It’s interesting to see some of the similarities between cj and brother cavil (AKA John)
Jim – good point on the cj flip-flops. Way too many to count. To my knowledge, he has never admited he was ever wrong during his flip flops.
I don’t think the problem is in how they (Powlison, CJ, SGM, Tim Keller) DEFINE slander, it is how they apply that definition. Yes, “kata” denotes position, and in this case, “against.”
But if you apply this definition to anyone and everything that speak negatively then Jesus would be guilty of slandering the Pharisees, Paul would be guilty of slandering Alexander and John Mark, Peter would be guilty of slandering the Jews for crying out loud! And don’t forget Nathan would be guilty of slandering King David when he cofronted him..and Deborah slandering Barak, and so on..
We aren’t all Balaams simply because we speak out. What ridiculous logic, once again, SGM uses. Do these people even HAVE a brain? As for Tim Keller and Powlison, someone should contact them and tell them what their article is being used for – to cover up and defend the sins of leadership in SGM.
hey..I just realized, for once SGM didn’t redefine something because it WORKS to their advantage in this case – but they did misapply it, so again, manipulation. Usually they can manipulate by redefining Biblical terms and then applying then out of context, but it is equally effective and profitable for them to use a Biblical definition and simply misapply it.
We need to use Biblical definitions and apply them Biblically as well, not in a manner that protects ourselves, our idols, our desires, our agendas…it is all to be to exalt Christ and bring Him glory..
and they talk about US not “living out” the gospel…geez.
I thought you all might enjoy this exceptional quote from Sam Storms:
“There are people, professing Christian people, who are determined to
bring you under their religious thumb. They are bent on making you a
slave of their conscience. They have built a tidy religious box, without
biblical justification, and strive to stuff you inside and make you conform
to its dimensions. They are legalists, and their tools are guilt, fear,
intimidation, and self-righteousness. They proclaim God’s unconditional
love for you, but insist on certain conditions before including you among
the accepted, among the approved elite, among God’s favored few.
I’m not talking about people who insist you obey certain laws or moral
rules in order to be saved. Such people aren’t legalists. They are lost!
They are easily identified and rebuffed. I’m talking about Christian
legalists whose goal is to enforce conformity among other Christians in
accordance with their personal preferences. These are life-style legalists.
They threaten to rob you of joy and to squeeze the intimacy out of your
relationship with Jesus. They may even lead you to doubt your salvation.
They heap condemnation and contempt on your head so that your life is
controlled and energized by fear rather than freedom and joy and delight
in God. Rarely would these folk ever admit to any of this. They don’t
perceive or portray themselves as legalists. If they are reading this they
are probably convinced I’m talking about someone else. They’d never
introduce themselves: “Hi! My name is Joe/Julie. I’m a legalist and my
goal is to steal your joy and keep you in bondage to my religious
prejudices. Would you like to go to lunch after church today and let me
tell you all the things you’re doing wrong?”
I suspect that some of you are either legalists or, more likely, the victims
of legalism. You live in fear of doing something that another Christian
considers unholy, even though the Bible is silent on the subject. You are
terrified of incurring their disapproval, disdain, and ultimate rejection.
Worse still, you fear God’s rejection for violating religious traditions or
cultural norms that have no basis in Scripture but are prized by the
legalist. You have been duped into believing that the slightest
misstep or mistake will bring down God’s disapproval and disgust.
When you are around other Christians, whether in church or a home
group or just hanging out, do you feel free? Does your spirit feel relaxed
or oppressed? Do you sense their acceptance or condemnation? Do you
feel judged, inadequate, inferior, guilty, immature, all because of your
perceived failure to conform to what someone else regards as “holy”?
Jesus wants to set you free from such bondage! As Paul said, “you were
called to freedom”!”
– Sam Storms http://www.enjoyinggodministri.....liberty/
TN-
Thank you!
Awesome quote from an esteemed reformed charismatic….
Amazing quote. It says everything. We can all go home, now.
Well shoot, we can’t. There are still too many saints stuck in the system of legalism, while being taught that they have the true gospel. Sigh. Guess we’d better roll up our sleeves. We’re going to be here a while.
I was pondering on top of my cage a while ago. If I were a Pastor who loved God’s people, how would I handle it if not just one but many people came to me and said they felt controlled and used by me? OMG – I would want to know EVERYTHING. How did I controll you? How did I use you? How did I hurt and betray you? All I ever wanted to do was teach you about Jesus Christ. How could I have hurt any of you? Please, please, tell me what I must do to make it right!
If my reaction is like this, and I am not a pastor. why isn’t there even one SGM pastor willing to come on here and admit to doing wrong? Why? Where is the love?
Canary, there must be something good in the air on top of your cage. :-)
In my narrow, protected little world, my experience was bring up an issue with the “senior pastor” and he will listen, at least give that impression. Then comes the mantra of his call from God, his vast experience as a pastor, and how we should submit to him because God has put him over us–you know the “covering thing.” And the finally, he infoems you of your pride and arrogance and sends you away with CJ’s book on humility.
And by the way MARKS you as someone who should be ignored in any “important ” “service” in the “church.” The man (victum) I am talking about here signed up for 4 ministry opportuinties in the “church” and was never called, asked. or approached for any of them. He wondered why and what was going on. It is just the SG way.
Canary and Juli,
I believe that CJ and most of those in leadership sincerely believe they are doing the right thing. I mean I believe that they sincerely believe they are doing the best they can for God’s people. (Not true, I know.) I think what it comes down to, and I know some may disagree, is having as their aim, their main agenda, the pursuit of holiness. My husband said it was more like the pursuit of sinlessness because it’s more about what we don’t do. But anyway, you get the idea. If the aim is holiness of these people that they believe God has entrusted to their care, then everything else will bow to that aim.
Now I can’t speak regarding those pastors who have sinned against all of you and are being unrepentant. That’s another story. But speaking about the legalism and the control itself, I think it boils down to their aim. (I hope that doesn’t sound insensitive.)
FF, thank you so much for sharing that quote! It was just what I’ve been thinking, hoping to be true. And she puts it so beautifully, so clearly. I pray God will open many more eyes.
TN, thanks for sharing this quote. I like how he differentiates between those who say, ‘do this to be saved,’ and those who ‘enforce conformity, life-style legalists.’ Those ideas are helpful in better understanding what we mean when we say, ‘legalism.’
When I asked my pastor if he had ever encountered “my problem” before (I confessed legalism and idolatry of the church) He said “No.”
He’s been a pastor 27 years and he has NEVER dealt with idolatry of the church itself? Or legalism in the church?
Clearly it goes without saying he isn’t gifted with discernment.. mercy and helps- yes, but not discernment.
Anyways…his response made me feel even MORE insane and like somehow I didn’t really know what was going on - which I didn’t. I didn’t know there were “higher powers” at work – I’m talking about both the human kind and the spiritual kind.
We have to keep teaching and sharing that legalism in sanctification IS the problem with most Christians, since many don’t believe you can work for salvation (although some do, I don’t deny that) but most of the brothers and sisters steeped in shepherding and the like also believe in eternal security, perserverance of the saints, etc…so when we say legalism, they respond with ”huh?”
it makes no sense how this type of practice could be the result of such grace-based doctgrines..geez, they are called doctrines of GRACE after all, not the doctrines of works! Yet somehow, many of us didn’t experience much grace in SGM churches. I think if you experience grace from the Body of Christ it surely helps you to experience and understand the grace of God. When you are surrounded with people who won’t accept you unless you do x,y, and z, then you start thinking God is that way too..
a wicked, wicked system of works. Who has bewitched SGM?
“We have to keep teaching and sharing that legalism in sanctification IS the problem with most Christians, since many don’t believe you can work for salvation (although some do, I don’t deny that) but most of the brothers and sisters steeped in shepherding and the like also believe in eternal security, perserverance of the saints, etc…so when we say legalism, they respond with ”huh?””
That is so true. When I tried to explain the legalism no one understood. So I then tried explaining it. I believe many of the sheep have good intentions and honestly believe they are doing the correct thing (following after godliness) but it is taken to the far and becomes a legalistic mindset. My friends also couldn’t understand how holding the local church as an idol was a bad thing because the church is ”good.”
Taking Note,
First time poster here (I think), but long time reader. I LOVED the link you gave to Dr. Storms. Very clear and explanatory. I did a little exploring of his website and there’s a lot more there that can be used in personal Bible study, thinking/contemplation, and prayer. I’ve bookmarked it for later reading and study. Thank you!
London
London, thanks for saying hello! Welcome to the Refuge!
Bethany, EXACTLY the same thing happend to me. I trid to explain and people didn’t get it, and then when I finally just came out and said “The CHURCH is my idol” they said “Well how can that be? The church is good?”
My care group leader said that the church EXPOSES idolatry, not encourages it,and is accountability. And I said, “yeah, I know it is SUPPOSED to work that way..but in my case it didn’t!”
How can the church protect us from itself?
“How can the church protect us from itself?”
Love that question! I would also love to hear what a pastor would have to say in reply. The system they are setting up sets the church up to become our idol. I started to realize that as I talked to my friends that they can no longer see certain aspects of idolatry when it comes to the local church. It was really sad to realize that no one makes a distinction between evangelism/missions and planting churches.
:-/
London Welcome!
Canary, we happen to own Serenity, but I didn’t remember much about it, so I’m just watching it again now. It’s a powerful message and an amazing metaphor for legalism. There’s the line from one of those who administered the drug (which you likened to legalism) where she says, “We meant it for the best.” Of course those who administer legalism mean it for our best as well.
And then when the good guys are making up their minds to go public and “pass on the bad report,” the captain says, “Somebody has to speak for these people…[because of] the belief that they [the government] can make people better, and I do not hold to that. So no more running. I aim to misbehave.” Then one of the crew says this inspiring line, “[If you] can’t do something smart, do something right.”
Well, I get it, too, Canary. Glad you mentioned it. : )
Hi Bethany, I think that since the church (leadership) has as it’s aim the “pursuit of holiness” instead of the pursuit of God, then they also are committing an idolatry. They try very hard to make it O.K. But I really do not think they see that they use even “the cross” in their unbiblical pursuit.
The goal is all wrong and all the effort to reach it is directed at “self,” rather than toward God. Everything bows to the goal, even their particular polity which they deem necessary as the enforcement of that pursuit.
Bethany,
Yes, I agree with you whole heartedly about the pastors sincerely believing that they are doing what they are called to.
Mentioning Brent again, if I may, when I knew him, he was just as hard on himself (even more so) than he was on the rest of us. He was an honorable man at least, because he practiced everything he preached. No problem with sincerity there. I suppose the judaisers that Paul spoke of in Phil. (I think – need to look it up), were very sincere in preaching legalism, but Paul still called them “dogs”. I am not calling any pastor a dog, myself. Back then, to call a Jew a dog was the worst form of insult.
Paul MEANT his words. It angered him when anyone tried to give a gospel apart from grace. It shoud anger us, or at least stir us to speak the truth to everyone we can, like we try to do here. Anyway, good insights, Bethany.
Bree,
I was in PDI near its beginnings. Before they took over our church, we were always talking about building a New Testament church. When the apostles came in, we began to hear about seeking holiness (that was after the church split). Then, we heard how we should have a passion for doctrine (Brent’s words). THEN, it became all about the cross. Do you think, eventually, these guys will finally make it to the risen tomb, and Jesus Christ? No insults intended, but it does seem to me that the focus keeps being redefined. Wonder what will be next? Or will they remain at the cross, powerless, comfortless, and sinful? Only time will tell.
Gratefully Dis.,
Yes, the air is good where I perch. Notice who gets the “fruits” of my dinner!
Canary,
Yes I see that. The recipient doesn’t appear very grateful though, does he, or is that a she–oops, only males allowed.
Bree (again),
And then when the good guys are making up their minds to go public and “pass on the bad report,” the captain says, “Somebody has to speak for these people…[because of] the belief that they [the government] can make people better, and I do not hold to that. So no more running. I aim to misbehave.” Then one of the crew says this inspiring line, “[If you] can’t do something smart, do something right.”
So glad you got what I was saying! Don’t you think it was funny that the good guys were cowboys who flew a spaceship? “I aim to misbehave.” Now, them thar is quotable words!
What amazes me is that the crew of the ship were just ordinary people trying to make a living beneath the radar of a corrupt government. They weren’t special. They each had their own faults. Let’s just say, most of them were out to keep each other safe and alive during a time of great turmoil in the universe.
They didn’t plan on saving people. They sort of “fell” into it. Once they understood what was really going on, well, they followed the code of the old west. Innocent people were dying because of the government’s wrong doing. The crew could not ignore this. So, these rather selfish, sinful, unruly men and women risked their lives to get the truth out.
I aim to misbehave – ha-ha. Can you imagine if a whole lot of ordinary SGM folk decided to do this – misbehave, by asking questions, coming in late on Sundays, not tything, skipping Care group, reading books NOT from the book table, challenging a sermon during the sermon? Oops, better not instigate…
So cowboys, saddle up. If we can’t do something smart, we aim to do something right. We are revealing the truth about legalism!
I must add that “Serenity” has some unsavory, sci-fi violence. The really bad guys are cannabals, though I find the action more scary than gruesome. The movie doesn’t focus on violence like slasher movies do. I’m not promoting the movie, just how the story compares a little with what we do here.
canary-
This could be my motto- If we can’t do something smart, we aim to do something right.
Obviously, the mark is often missed. I’d rather take a swing and miss than sit on the bench.
Jim,
I gettcha. We are weak in our flesh, and make mistakes. Our weaknesses and hidden faults, as David puts it, sometimes make us say or do something not so “smart”. But we are aiming to do something right. Like in “Serenity”, the good guys were not perfect in any way, except that they saw the suffering of the innocent, and decided to “misbehave” (I LOVE that quote!).
If those men and women in “Serenity” had decided to become model citizens before setting out to give the truth to the universe, the universe would have become din-din to the really bad guys. The Pastors in SGM seem to expect perfection from anyone who corrects them. Won’t happen. So here we are, in all our imperfections, covered by the blood, getting the truth of the good news out to people who are in bondage to a horribe, controlling system that ought not be practiced in the church. I wasn’t kidding when I said before that legalism cannibalizes our faith.
So, swing away, Jim!
Okay, maybe I’m getting too corny, but did you ever see “Signs”?
Another sci-fi…when the alien came into the house to go after our heroes, Meryl was told to “swing away”. All his adult life had set him up for that moment. You see, Meryl was an ex-baseball player. He could hit a ball so hard it made records. However, he also made another record – the most amounts of strikes ever. He took every ball that came at him, and tried to hit it. When asked why he did this, he said, “It didn’t seem right not to swing.” So, when the alien came after his nephew, Meryl grabbed his keep sake bat off the wall, swung away, and killed the alien.
I think of Peter, Matthew, Luke, Paul, Mary…all the saints that went before us. Did they know of their faults? Did they, fisherman, tax collector, doctor, prostitute, and Pharisee, ever see themselves as perfect, able to spread the gospel in its purity? Huh, I think not. We are justified by faith, sanctified through faith, and we’d rather swing and miss, than stay benched. We need the Holy Spirit to guide us. Then, like Meryl, we swing away, because “it doesn’t seem right not to swing”.
Gratefully Disillusioned,
Canary,
Yes I see that. The recipient doesn’t appear very grateful though, does he, or is that a she–oops, only males allowed.
HA! Actually, I’ve seen women be far more Pharisical than some men I’ve known. Women can be alot crueler in their judging of other women. Maybe it is because we are so insecure, so ready to follow, or so desiring to be looked at as successful in our Christian walk.
I’m not dissing women, here. I just know what I’ve seen. When the Pastor’s wife gives her teaching on how to be an amazing wife, we take our notes, scribbling furiously. Then, we try hard to manage our lives and family the same way. I really think we are afraid. Fear motivates us. We love our families and children, and want God’s protection over them. So we do what we are told, thinking, superstitiously I might add, that God will then keep us all safe. We also take pride in our wonderfully behaved children, our clean houses, and our well cared for husbands. Then, we look condescendingly upon women who aren’t doing as well.
Those of us who don’t do as well (ME!), feel condemned and only try harder in our flesh. We burn out. When I finally burned out, I finally found the true gospel. So, thank God for my burn out, and his forgiveness for all the times that I, as a pharisee, judged women whose kids didn’t behave, or whose house was a mess when I visited. Not that my house was any cleaner! Thank you God, for your mercy in letting all my spinning plates fall about my feet, breaking into tiny pieces. When I stopped all the nonsense, I was finally able to learn about grace.
Canary,
Very well said about the gospel at the end of the burn out!!!! Amen and amen.
I know this is off the subject, but is anything going on with the Chesapeake situation or is there just a return to the same old, same old? Does anyone have an update?