Purpose:
This little article concerns about “legalism” that may not be so obvious in the corporate setting in the churches. This is not about what legalism is, although I do mention it. This article is about what the legalists (those who espouse legalistic ideas or tendencies) produce in the church.
Disclaimer:
1. This is not an article against SGM. So please keep that in mind. The issue of legalism is everywhere. Since our sinful nature gravitates to either license or legalism, it will be widespread, especially in those “conservative” churches.
2. I emphasize again that this article is not pointed to any particular denomination or fellowship.
Introduction:
The term, “legalism” is not used in the Scriptures, but as the term indicates, it has something to do with “legal” or “law” or “rules” and at basic level “legalism” deals with our attitude towards the law in our relationship with God.
Legalism can be defined as, “one’s attempt to earn or gain God’s acceptance or approval by keeping the laws of God.” This was the case for the Jews who would pursue God’s righteousness by works of the law. Paul said, “but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works” (Rom. 9:31,32). Again, Paul said, “I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly” (Gal. 2:21).
Personal legalism:
All of us are born under the law; therefore it is natural for us to gravitate to the law as a basis for our acceptance with God. When we become a Christian – by hearing the message of the Gospel, we experience initial joy and love of the Gospel. But we do not habitually apply the Gospel everyday in our relationship with God. Soon after we become a child of God, we often build our relationship with God on the basis of our obedience or disobedience to His law – for this is our natural tendency in the flesh. So we often measure God’s approval (or disapproval) on the basis of our personal holiness, obedience, sacrifice, and ministry. This is typical for many Christians. They believe the Gospel for salvation, but for their Christian life, they live by the law. This is what I call, “personal legalism.”
But Paul, his acceptance with God was based on faith in what Christ has done for him every day. Paul’s life of obedience, holiness, and ministry had no bearing on his acceptance to God. He was not more accepted because he was obedient, if so, then he would have something to boast about, but he did not. Actually he said, “whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted [perfect tense] as loss for the sake of Christ. More than that, I count [present tense] all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count [present tense] them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith” (Phil. 3:8,9).
What Paul is saying is this, “The basis of my righteousness and my acceptance to God is faith in Christ and not my works of the law past and present. Actually, I consider all my works of the law (past and present) as loss and rubbish when they are compared to Christ.” Paul puts no confidence or trust in his works of obedience or holiness, but considered them as “dung” compared to faith in Christ for righteousness. So Geneva Bible (1599 edition) comments, “He (Paul) shuts out all works, those that go before, as well as those that come after faith.”
The Gospel says, “Because I am accepted by faith, I want to live acceptably.” But the Law says, “I must live acceptably, so that I may be accepted.” NOTE: living the acceptable life is the same for both, but the reasons are different: The Gospel way has the assurance of acceptance due to faith in Christ. But the Law-way has no assurance of acceptance.
“Legalism occurs wherever a sinner attempts to earn God’s favor by his or her personal righteousness instead of by Christ’s transferred righteousness. Legalism demeans the value of Christ’s work of atonement by requiring sinners to perform activities that are man-centered and, in essence, man-exalting. Even subtle, unspoken legalism sets forth a course that inevitably leads to spiritual pride and eventual defeat under the weight of unsuccessfully attempted law keeping. Paul reacted against all forms of legalism with force and focus, calling for those who teach such lies to ‘be accursed’ (Gal. 1:8-9) and even wishing that those who were unsettling the Galatian Christians would ‘emasculate themselves’ (Gal. 5:12). This is strong language. But such attacks by Paul do not seem shocking when we pause to consider what is at stake. By substituting man-centered performance as the basis for acquiring righteousness, the very essence and foundation of redemptive truth is compromised.” (Jerry Bridges and Bob Bevington, The Great Exchange: My Sin for His Righteousness, pp. 156-58).
Corporate (church) legalism:
And the issue of “corporate legalism” is somewhat difficult to detect. For many churches would say that they trust in Christ alone for their acceptance and righteous standing before God. They would never deny this in principle. But when the Gospel is not preached in a functional level and conscientiously lived out each day, the churches will become legalistic in practice despite holding to the Gospel in principle.
So how can we detect corporate legalism? From Galatians, we see what the legalists (who espouse legalism) produce. Jesus said, “tree is known by its fruit” (Matt. 12:33). Likewise, we see the fruit of legalists. Let me briefly explain:
1. Legalists desire to bring others to bondage to their rules from the liberty in Christ (Gal. 2:4).
In Galatians, as you already know, the issue was the sufficiency of the Gospel for both the Jews and the Gentiles. But there was a group of Jewish “believers” who taught that the Gentiles needed not just faith in Christ but also needed to be circumcised like the Jews (cf. Acts 15:1,6). So they were not denying faith in Christ, but they were adding the condition that the Gentiles need to be circumcised and so that they could keep the laws of Moses as they were. They were saying: Christ + Moses > Christ.
John Stott said, “to introduce the works of the law and make our acceptance depend on our obedience to rules and regulations was to bring a free man into bondage again” (John Stott, The Message of Galatians, p. 43).
Legalists insist that their way is better and more acceptable to God because of their pure or rigid standard. They do not insist in the sufficiency of Christ. They will admit that Christ is necessary, but quickly add, “but if you really want to be a good Christian, then you’ve got to do these things as we are.” Such emphasis may not be so evident, but the pressure to conform is real and felt. So they bring believers into bondage to their rules and not Christ. And those who successfully attain such “standard” often become proud and rejoice in their “spirituality” and enjoy the acceptance of the group, while judging (at least in the heart) other believers who have not attained such “standard.” And those who could not attain such standard feel discouraged and detached from the love of God and the group.
2. Legalists create (or induce) an environment of “fear of men” (Gal. 2:11-14).
Peter, who knew the Gospel, gave into legalists’ pressure. Paul was upset that Peter would compromise Gospel-conviction because of the legalists. Gal. 2:12, “when [the legalists] came, [Peter] began to withdrew [from Gentile believers] and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of circumcision.” Peter wanted to keep his reputation among men, so he compromised his gospel conviction, and his action resulted in other Jewish believers to join him in hypocrisy (Gal. 2:13).
Legalists will create an environment where believers are more concerned about men’s approval than their identity in Christ. This fear is crippling, as it did Peter. The church may preach the Gospel, but if the culture of the church is driven by fear of men (i.e., desire for acceptance or fear of rejection) behind the façade of all the smiles, then believers will soon forget the grace of Christ and replace it with men’s rules.
3. Legalists need believers to need them (Gal. 4:17).
“Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good. What they want is to alienate you from us, so that you may be zealous for them” (Gal. 4:17 NIV). This verse shows the psychology of legalists:
[1] They show eagerness to people/believers, because:
[2] They want to remove the competition, so that:
[3] They will be sought by people/believers – feeding their sense of self-importance and self-esteem.
Tim Keller commented, “The Gospel-energized ministry does not need to have fans who are emotionally dependent on the leaders. These false teachers are ministering not because they are secure of their salvation but in order to be sure of and win their salvation… This means that they emotionally need to have people emotionally need them. They need their converts and their disciples to be wrapped up in their leaders, obeying and adoring them. Only this can assure them that they are good and great believers, blessed and favored by God” (Tim Keller, Paul’s Letter to Galatians: Leader’s Guide, p. 103).
4. Legalists want to make a “good showing” in the flesh (Gal. 6:13).
Legalists wanted to “look good” in their religion. Their boast does not come from Christ (as Paul did, Gal. 6:14), but making believers to adhere to their expectations externally (i.e., visible form). That is why they will “compel” (Gal. 6:12) believers to conform to their standard because the basis of their boasting is inseparably linked with men’s conformity to them.
James M. Boice said, “It was based on pride. The legalizers wanted to boast in the flesh of the Galatians. This means that they wanted to boast in the number of circumcisions… They were trophy hunters and wanted to be able to report on mass ‘conversion’ in Galatia. The humbling parallel would be in the tendency to take pride in counting the numbers of ‘decision for Christ’ or ‘baptisms’ today” (Boice, “Galatians” in the Expositor’s Bible Commentary, pp. 506-07).
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:00 am
doulos:
Simply outstanding.
This paragraph is worth a repeat:
“Legalists will create an environment where believers are more concerned about men’s approval than their identity in Christ. This fear is crippling, as it did Peter. The church may preach the Gospel, but if the culture of the church is driven by fear of men (i.e., desire for acceptance or fear of rejection) behind the façade of all the smiles, then believers will soon forget the grace of Christ and replace it with men’s rules.”
Pow.
~jw
April 23rd, 2009 at 4:11 am
“Who are you trust’in in?”
By substituting “SGM man-centered performance” as the basis for acquiring “God’s righteousness”, the very essence and foundation of God’s redemptive truth is indeed compromised.
Ops!
Slightly Mis-Directed would be a better term.
What?
–If I leave IAD, Dulles and want to fly to DIA, Denver, let’s say, and my compass is one degree out of cal., will I ever reach DIA, Denver?
Huh?
Not by plane… I’m afraid. (snicker)
By substituting “SGM man-centered performance”: i.e. “CJ’s righteousness” for “God’s righteousness” (Jesus’ sacrifice on the tree), we will never get there…
When “there” , the final destination, is God’s heaven. (be’in wit Jesus!)
Therefore, if we are trusting in SGM man-centered “righteousness”, we will not have God’s righteousness, and not see God’s heaven. (and not be wit Jesus) (sad face)
We may, however, see ole Slu_foot’s barbie…
But that’s another story…
No laughing matter in my book.
How about yours?
In the twinkling of an eye,
Sopy!
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:45 am
Doulos,
Thank-you for this very clear commentary on legalism. I liked this quote from Jerry Bridges,
“Legalism demeans the value of Christ’s work of atonement by requiring sinners to perform activities that are man-centered and, in essence, man-exalting.”
I’m not sure I’ve ever spent more time thinking about myself and my sinfulness and how I was progressing in my sanctification than when I was a member of a SG church. You can’t have it both ways, you can’t have all the rules and at the same time say, “In Christ alone.” I hope and pray your post here will help open eyes to that fact.
Blessings,
Bree
“When we see salvation whole,
its every single part
is found in Christ,
And so we must beware
lest we derive the smallest drop
from somewhere else.
For if we seek salvation, the very name of Jesus
teaches us
that he possesses it.
If other Spirit-given gifts are sought–
in his anointing they are found;
strength–in his reign;
and purity–in his conception;
and tenderness–expressed in his nativity,
in which in all respects like us he was,
that he might learn to feel our pain:
Redemption when we seek it, is in his passion found;
acquiital–in his condemnation lies;
and freedom from the curse–in his own cross is given.
If satisfaction for our sins we seek–we’ll find it in his
sacrifice;
and cleansing in his blood.
If reconciliation now we need, for this he entered Hades,
To overcome our sins we need to know
that in his tomb they’re laid.
Then newness of our life–his resurrection brings
and immortality as well comes also with that gift.
And if we also long to find
inheritance in heaven’s reign,
his entry there secures it now
with our protection, safety, too, and blessings that abound
–all flowing from his royal throne.
The sum of all this:
For those who seek
this treasure-trove of blessings of all kinds,
in no one else can they be found
than him,
for all are given
in Christ alone.”
–John Calvin
April 23rd, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Thank you Bree!
Blessings!
Sopy
P.S. I’ze has dis idea fer ya:
Draw a little “Crown” on your bathroom mirror with a dry erase sharpie.
It’s a cool idea ta remind ya of who ya belong to (–>Jesus) and what He has in store for ya (–>a “crown”).
Let those dag blasted de_meaners go suck buttermilk… he he
;~)
April 23rd, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Sopy,
Baffled again… (you know what I mean?)
Thank-you
April 23rd, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Bree said: I’m not sure I’ve ever spent more time thinking about myself and my sinfulness and how I was progressing in my sanctification than when I was a member of a SG church. You can’t have it both ways, you can’t have all the rules and at the same time say, “In Christ alone.” I hope and pray your post here will help open eyes to that fact.
This is so true for those in SGM churches. The interesting thing is that CJ has given messages on legalism, defining it and teaching it. However, like so many other issues, what is taught is not lived out. Not by the pastors and not by the sheep. Most folks in SGM churches would not think that they are operating in legalism but it is a major issue.
April 23rd, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Hi Fred,
If you take a look at SGM’s statement of faith under “Man’s Response to the Gospel” you’ll see where they refer to taking up our cross as part of our response–to the GOSPEL. How dare they? It isn’t that Jesus doesn’t ask us to do this, it’s that it’s not a prerequisite to salvation. So whatever they say from the pulpit, they believe and state quite clearly that you must have a certain response in order to be a believer, which in my mind, is adding something to Christ’s finished work.
Sola fide. They call themselves Reformed, but apparently they have not actually studied the reformers themselves. Check it out, CJ:
“…Scripture, when it speaks of faith-righteousness, leads us…to turn aside from the contemplation of our own works and look solely upon God’s mercy and Christ’s perfection.” [Institutes, 3.11.16, Calvin] (It’s only Calvin, but we shouldn’t be contemplating our works?)
“…what way do we have to humble ourselves except that, wholly poor and destitute, we yield to God’s mercy. For if we think that we have anything left to ourselves, I do not call it humility. And those who have hitherto joined these two things together – namely, that we must think humbly concerning ourselves before God and must reckon our righteousness to be of some value – have taught a pernicious hypocrisy…. If you would, according to God’s judgment, be exalted with the humble, your heart ought to be wounded with…contrition. If that does not happen, you will be humbled by God’s powerful hand to your shame and disgrace.” [Institutes, 3.12.6, Calvin] (It’s only Calvin, but did you catch that, CJ? Our righteousness is of zero value.)
“Wherever the holy scriptures command good works to be done, understand that it forbids you to do any good work by yourself, because you cannot; but to keep a holy Sabbath unto God, that is, a rest from all your works, and that you become dead and buried and permit God to work in you.” [Operationes in Psalmos, Luther] (Not SGM, but GOD??)
And this, too:
Westminster Larger Catechism, Question 73:
“Faith justifies a sinner in the sight of God, not because of those other graces which do always accompany it, or of good works that are the fruits of it, nor as if the grace of faith, or any act thereof, were imputed to him for justification, but only as it is an instrument by which he receives and applies Christ and his righteousness.”
Oh, and the Resistance of Paul of Tarsus:
“It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.” [Galatians 5:1] (I think he’s talking about you here, CJ… the yoke of slavery part.)
In Christ Alone,
Bree
April 23rd, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Bree,
Glad you worked Luther in there…. oh, and Paul too
There is clearly an oral tradition in SGM. Note that Jesus never spoke against the law, as He completely (utterly, totally, perfectly) obeyed the law on our behalf, but slammed the oral tradition hard.
April 23rd, 2009 at 5:49 pm
Exactly, Jim, Pharisees, the whole lot of ‘em. : )
April 23rd, 2009 at 6:28 pm
<i>I’m not sure I’ve ever spent more time thinking about myself and my sinfulness and how I was progressing in my sanctification than when I was a member of a SG church. You can’t have it both ways, you can’t have all the rules and at the same time say, “In Christ alone.” I hope and pray your post here will help open eyes to that fact.</i>
It wasn’t even so bad as that. It was much much worse. We had to watch other people’s holiness too.
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:26 pm
FreeIndeed,
Hi, they teach so many strange things, don’t they? “Teaching for doctrine the tradtions of men.”
I’m glad to be free, too.
Blessings,
Bree
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Antidote to legalism is the life bent on the Gospel. In Galatians, Paul said:
Gal. 2:5, “But we did not yield in subjection to them [legalists/false brethren, 2:4] for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you.” NOTE:
1. We must be UNYIELDING when it comes to the gospel truth and its freedom. Paul said, “we did not yield…” It is to refuse it. It is not to give in. We must be stubborn in battle against legalisms. The extent of such refusal? Not “even for an hour.” Legalism kills. So we cannot afford to say, “Oh, one little legalistic pattern is OK.” NO! We must not allow
2. We remain in the Gospel truth as a result. Notice the purpose clause, “so that… (Gk. hina) the truth of the gospel would remain with you.” In order for the Gospel truth to remain in the churches, we must not give in to any form of legalisms. The content of the Gospel truth is firmly possessed by the church, when the church actively roots out legalisms in believers’ life and replace it with the “new life” of the Gospel.
Luther knew this battle was difficult. He said,
“The truth of the gospel is that our righteousness comes by faith alone, without the works of the law… The true Gospel teaches that works are not the ornament or perfection of faith, but that faith of itself is God’s gift and God’s work in our hearts, which justifies us because it takes hold of Christ our Redeemer. Human reason has the law for its object, thinking, ‘I have done this; I have not done that.’ But faith in itself has no object but Jesus Christ, the Son of God, given up to death for the sins of the whole world. It doe not say, ‘What have I done? In what have I offended? What have I deserved?’ It says, ‘What has Christ done? What has he deserved?’ He has redeemed you from your sin, from the devil, and from eternal death…
Anyone turning his eyes away from this object (i.e., Christ) has no true faith, but only a fantasy and a vain opinion, and turns his eyes from the promise to the law, which terrifies us and drives us to desperation… Some people will say that the law is divine and holy. Let the law have its glory, but no law, however divine and holy, should teach me that I am justified and will live by it. I grant it may teach me that I should love God and my neighbor; also to live in chastity, sobriety, patience, and so on. But it ought not to show me how I can be delivered from sin, the devil, death, and hell. I must listen to the Gospel, which teaches me not what I ought to do (for that is the proper function of the law), but what Jesus Christ, the Son of God, has done for me – namely, he suffered and died to set me free from sin and death. The Gospel wants me to receive this and believe it. This is the truth of the Gospel. It is also the principal article of all Christian doctrine, in which consists the knowledge of all godliness. It is therefore most necessary that we should know this article well and teach it to others continually. This understanding is tender and easily damaged. Paul knew this, and all godly people have experienced it (Luther, Galatians, pp. 71-73).
Amen and Amen.
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Amen, Bree. Amen.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:28 pm
doulos-excellent! Thank you so much for your post and comments.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:55 pm
Doulos,
Thank you for this instructive post. I think we all tend towards legalism; it is a condition of man’s heart. One phrase that helps me keep it all in perspective:
Christ died for our sins, and for our good works, too.
Hallelujah, what a Savior!
In His Grace,
P.D.
protestantdame at gmail.com
April 24th, 2009 at 7:43 am
In our former SGM church, talking about one’s sinfulness was lifted up as a mark of holiness. There was a striving to be perfect, to fit in, trying to model the perfect family with all the rules and regulations, saying exactly the same phrases, doing the same things in the same way. In the early years we would talk about the stepford wives – why didn’t we run out the door then? I just don’t know.
One thing that you find in a legalistic church is a lack of love – lack of love for Jesus and for the people. I believe that this is one of the main reasons that SGM has gotten so far off track. Hearts have become hard and cold which happens when you are operating out of the law and not the Spirit.
I am so thankful that God led us out of SGM. We are in a church now with much evidence of love for Jesus and for the Body of Christ. Our new pastor loves the whole body of Christ. It is so amazing to hear him speak of the whole body with such love and respect. The Holy Spirit is moving in this church and we are encouraged to walk in freedom and the Spirit. Yes sin is taken seriously but it is not legalistic and controlling. Another amazing thing to me is that this pastor actually trusts the Holy Spirit in the lives of the believers in His congregation. Thank you Lord for your grace and mercy in removing us from SGM.
April 24th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Doulos,
Thankyou for the excellent and thorough posting on legalism–You have brought light and clarity to the extreme dangers it infests upon the Body of Christ.
Bree,
Love the Calvin quote…and remembering that ONLY in Christ alone can the treasure trove of blessing be found…Christ alone..
I was particularly struck by #4—it is so reflective of SGM: “Legalists want to make a “good showing” in the flesh (Gal 6:13)…..Their boast doesnot come from Christ BUT MAKING BELIEVERS ADHERE TO THEIR EXPECTATIONS EXTERNALLY. THAT IS WHY THEY WILL ‘”COMPELL”(Gal 6:12) BELIEVERS TO CONFORM TO THEIR STANDARD BECAUSE THE BASIS OF THEIR BOASTING IS INSEPARABLY LINKED WITH MENS CONFORMITY TO THEM.”
Compelling Gods people to be motivated by a check-list,hinders and/or removes seeking the Lord—knowing Him….hearing His Voice…walking in relationship with Him. Mans control takes away the Lordship of Christ. Jesus VALUES people—legalists do not. And so, when people arenot valued—they are not heard—they are dismisssed and discarded……..Pastors who thoroughly believe they stand “in the very stead of God” are the little caesars of Christianity,instead of trusting the Holy Spirit to move in those whom Christ dwells—those whom Jesus said would contain “rivers of Living Water”…
Legalism in SGM has left behind a trail of mauled, and wounded people…all in the name of Sovereignty and Grace…….what a mockery of a loving God. And we have seen in many postings the coverups, the sexual abuses,lies,deceit,twisting of truth presenting situations to congregations……….These are the very real life situations the Holy Spirit is bringing to light…..It is a dangerous place to be to disregard the warnings of the Holy Spirit…”A false balance is an abomination to the Lord,but a just weight is his delight.” Prov 11:1……….An abomination to the Lord: to be false—to be duplictous,deceiving on how a balance is presented to appear……. This is so very serious and sobering……….
April 25th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Waters,
Hi, good posting! You said,
“Compelling Gods people to be motivated by a check-list,hinders and/or removes seeking the Lord—knowing Him….hearing His Voice…walking in relationship with Him. Mans control takes away the Lordship of Christ. Jesus VALUES people—legalists do not.”
This was my experience. The contrast between being at SG and being out is that I have Jesus.
Praise you, Jesus!
In Him,
Bree
April 26th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
Wow! What an enlightened statement Luther made! “The true Gospel teaches that works are not the ornament or perfection of faith…”
That is IT in a nutshell. They wear their works as ornaments of their faith. When my “works” were not as fantabulous as theirs — i.e. my children didn’t look them in the eye and greet them every time or I didn’t spank them enough or whatever — I could see the ” holier than thou” expressions on the faces of people I had come to consider exemplary. So I began “working” even harder to please the leaders over me. SO I BECAME AN ORNAMENT WEARER, TOO! That’s how it works within SGM, or how it did back when I was involved in the early 90s.
Thanks for bringing such clarity, Doulos and Bree!
April 27th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Thank God for those Galatians!
I’m with P.D – (and Luther?) – legalism is the fruit of our carnal heart looking for something to fill our God-shaped, grace-craving need. Like Adam we desperately want to look good for God. And this is not exclusive to SGM, of course.
We all need a Savior!
Marvelous writings, thank you all.
April 29th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
The book of Galations is EXCELLENT for helping dispel the KOOL-AID mists and bewitchments of SGM and other such places.
But I’ll warn you — the Kool-Aid is so potent, that Galations (and other such section of the Bible) probably won’t make much sense, and you’ll probably have to read it over and over and over for it to even begin to crack open the bewitchment.
But God’s Word doesn’t return void.
Excellent booklet –
Knowing God Through Galatians
April 30th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Jim, Looking forward to your follow up article on Antinomianism.
April 30th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Time for a pop-quiz
An “antinomian” is…………
A) Someone who avoids conflict at all cost?
B) Someone who deneys the validity of moral laws?
C) Someone who is called to lead a great crusade?
N.S.L.B.
April 30th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
antinomianism -literally, “anti-legalism” or lawlessness; in regard to the NT Pauline corpus, it is the belief (expressed, e.g., by some Corinthians) that “all things are lawful” to those who are in Christ, that is, that individual conscience (apart from social impact) need be the only guide for ethical behavior; also known as libertinism.Antinomianism is the polar opposite of legalism, the notion that obedience to a code of religious law is necessary for salvation.
And from Wikipedia
antinomian (plural antinomians)
One who maintains that, under the gospel dispensation, the moral law is of no use or obligation, but that faith alone is necessary to salvation. The sect of Antinomians originated with Johannes Agricola, in Germany, about the year 1535.
April 30th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Paul,
Would you consider the author of this post (doulos) antinomian?
How about Luther, or RTS professor Steve Brown?
BTW, wiki is a very poor source for theology. You sure you want to do this dance in public?
antinomianism -literally, “anti-legalism” is a completely false definition.
April 30th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Hi Paul!
I was the one who wrote an article about “Christian Legalism.” And I am not an Antinomian. You said, “that faith alone is necessary to salvation.” This statement will be affirmed by both antinomian and non-antinomian group, including the Reformers of 16th century. Certainly Luther and Calvin were not Antinomians even though they were charged as such by Roman Catholics.
The issue is faith. Faith alone saves, but dead-faith is non-saving. True faith will bear fruit of love and obedience.
R.C. Sproul, I thought summarized it well:
Works = Justification (False)
Faith + Works = Justification (False)
Faith = Justification – Works (False)
Faith = Justification + Works (True)
So faith alone brings justification and results in works, that is why Gospel is neither legalistic nor license (antinomian). It is a new way of living in Christ.
April 30th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
But if it’s on WIKIPEDIA it MUST be true, right? LOL
No – I was just to lazy to find a theological site with the definition.
Great article, just commenting that it would be nice to see the follow up on antinomianism
As Christians, we constantly pendulum between both extremes. How many times have you sat during worship saying “I can’t worship now, after what I did last night”?
Or conversely “I can worship now, despite what I did last night, because it was covered by the blood so I don’t need to repent, and all my sins are covered from here on out so I am going to have a great time doing whatever I want”
Both are wrong. We can stand before God because of Christ alone.
If we are truly saved we are no longer slaves to sin, but now slaves to Christ. If we love Him, we can’t sin without the Holy Spirit bringing us to repentance. If we can freely live a life of sin with no desire to change, grow, repent, then it is a pretty good chance that we are not even saved.
Sproul’s quote Faith = Justification + Works (True) is excellent
April 30th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Paul –
Exactly! The Gospel is the antidote to BOTH legalism and license. The work of Christ on the cross did not only destroy the penalty of sin, but also the power of sin in our lives. Therefore those who are in Christ by faith, are justified and being sanctified.
I wrote elsewhere:
The Gospel is neither legalistic nor licentiousness. But our natural tendency is to distort it to either error. Both legalism (or “Christian-moralism”) and licentiousness (or “antinomianism”) are earthly principles and fleshly, but the Gospel is heavenly revelation and Spiritual. Therefore, unless we conscientiously cling on to the Gospel by faith, we will slowly drift away from it and land on either side of the Cross. Thus the pure gospel is always in danger to be corrupted or perverted by our natural instinct and sinfulness.
April 30th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
doulos, Amen!
Well said. Now forgive me, I’d like to write more but I have to go say 4 Hail Mary’s and a couple of Our Father’s; I remembered cheating at chutes and ladders in Kindergarden.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
People have sort of alluded to this sometimes on this and maybe SGMSurv, but have any SGM leaders/pastors/upper management actually said that they, the pastors and upper management, sit in the seat of Moses???
Or have they implied that they sit in the seat of Moses??? (Sometimes, their implications speak louder and more of their real purpose than their words.)
If so, that is VERY significant.
According to my understanding of relevant Bible passages — in Romans, Galations, Hebrews, etc. — that means they are admitting to being administrators of the Old Covenant, not the New Covenant. It means their identity for who they are and what they are doing is in the Law.
Moses is a symbol for the Law.
Jesus referred to the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law as sitting in Moses’ seat. While he commanded the people to obey them, He said He was ticked off at what they were doing to the people in His name. Um, that’s a paraphrase. And that was an instruction that ENDED when the Old Covenant ended, which was at the resurrection of Christ.
(And actually, the very literal NASB puts Matthew 23:1-3 as:
Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees HAVE SEATED THEMSELVES in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.”
If SGM leaders/pastors have admitted/implied they sit in Moses’ seat, that means their base, their foundation, and what they are teaching, is Law, not grace.
Galations 3: 9-11
So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith. All who rely on observing the law are undera curse, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.”
The last phrase, “The righteous will live by faith” is the verse that finally gave light to Martin Luther and allowed him to become saved by faith.
That means SGM upper management and pastors are admitting they are into and hold to the Law. It means that they are into and hold to legalistic standards, and making converts twice the sons of hell as they are, and living and doling out death and condemnation and the heavy burden of the Law instead of living and doling out life, to sheep who are being told they are receiving and who are expecting the New Covenant of forgiveness of sins, grace, and life.
Galations…. Galations….
*
By the way, saying the leaders sit in Moses’ seat is also a red flag warning of power and spiritual abuse. A google or such search will pull that info up….
–
Spiritual Abuse Profile
….#1) Authoritarian
The most distinctive characteristic of a spiritually abusive religious system, or leader, is the over-emphasis on authority. Because a group claims to have been established by God Himself the leaders in this system claim the right to command their followers.
This authority supposedly comes from the position they occupy. In Matthew 23:1-2 Jesus said the Scribes and Pharisees “sit in Moses’ seat,” a position of spiritual authority. Many names are used but in the abusive system this is a position of power, not moral authority. The assumption is that God operates among His people through a hierarchy, or “chain of command.” In this abusive system unconditional submission is often called a “covering,” or “umbrella of protection” which will provide some spiritual blessing to those who fully submit. Followers may be told that God will bless their submission even if the leadship is wrong. It is not their place to judge or correct the leadership – God will see to that…. –
It looks to me that God is seeing to that, if only SGM would really listen…. And the Bible says that God commonly corrects through people –Proverbs, what God told David about his sons. So SGM should have listened to their flock before this.
*
If SGM pastors/leaders have said they sit in Moses’ seat, instead of being ministers of the New Covenant, they are actually manipulating and coercing more and more people into ever increasing Dysfunctional Codependency. Along with straight-out-of-the-Bible Phariseeism. And more and more super-Catholic doctrine, with CJ the unelected Pope.
So much for their “family of churches” — it’s a dysfunctional and codependent family at best.
Search for phrases like “signs of dysfunctional codependence,” and compare with SGM standard practice.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Beloved of God,
I’ve never heard them use that phrase. I think I made it up.
Another denom has what they call the Moses principle or Moses Model (one man hearing from God on behalf of “the church”) and use this to support their sr pastor view. SGM would see their leaders in the same way, without using the term “Moses Principle”.
Dave Harvey writes, “The Old Testament offers a gallery of names that remind us of God’s practice of using one to influence many. Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Nehemiah, Jeremiah; the list is quite long.” Polity, Pg 7
So, I want to be clear that “they sit in the seat of Moses” is a little term of endearment I use, and not how SGM leaders would describe themselves.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:56 pm
Of course, they do Stand in the Very Stead of God.
April 30th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Awesome, Jim. ; )
April 30th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
ANTINOMIANISM
an•ti•no•mi•an n
[ML antinomus, fr. L anti- + Gk nomos law] 1565; 1.One who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation. 2.One who rejects a socially established morality — antinomian adj — an•ti•no•mi•an•ism \ n
___
Antinomianism: The idea that Christian liberty exempts one from the moral law. (Note 1)
A. Prevalence of, among:
Christians;Rom. 6:1–23
False Teachers; 2 Pet. 2:19; Jude 4
B. Based on error, that:
Grace allows sin Rom. 6:1, 2
Moral law is abolished. Rom. 7:1–14
Liberty has no bounds. 1 Cor. 10:23–33
C. Corrected by remembering, that liberty is:
Not a license to sin. Rom. 6:1–23
Limited by moral law. Rom. 8:1–4
Controlled by Holy Spirit. Rom. 8:5–14
Not to be a stumbling block. Rom. 14:1–23; 1 Cor. 8:1–13
Motivated by love. Gal. 5:13–15
___
ANTINOMIANISM. 2 Sam. 3:33; Rom. 8:2; 10:4; Gal. 2:21; 6:2 (Note 2)
___
“antinomianism (Gk., against the law) Rejection of the authority of the Mosaic Law on the grounds that it has been superseded by Christian grace and freedom, based partially on Romans 3:8. Some Gnostic sects, such as the Carpocratians, interpreted this freedom as a license to sin because only the spirit, and not the body, mattered. During the Reformation, antinomianism was revived by the Anabaptists and Agricola as an extension of the Lutheran doctrine of justification solely by grace. ” (Note 3)
___
“…speaking of antinomians. They were those who denied that there was any law at all in the Christian life. They declared that they were within the grace of God and that, therefore, it did not matter what they did; God would forgive. No further discipline and no further effort were necessary. Paul is insisting that to the end of the day the Christian life is the life of an athlete pressing onwards to a goal which is always in front. In Philippians 3:15 he again uses (the greek word) teleios and says that this must be the attitude of those who are teleios. What he means is: ‘Anyone who has come to be mature in the faith and knows what Christianity is must recognize the discipline and the effort and the agony of the Christian life.’ He may perhaps think differently, but, if he is an honest man, God will make it plain to him that he must never relax his effort or lower his standards but must press towards the goal, until the end. As Paul saw it, the Christian is the athlete of Christ.” (Note 4)
___
“The Second Epistle Of Peter. The letter was written about A.D. 65, probably to a broad readership. Peter’s purpose in writing this letter can be stated twofold. (1) Negatively, he was warning the believers concerning the outbreak of antinomianism (flagrant disregard for God’s commands) and heretical teachers who were infiltrating the assemblies. (2) Positively, Peter exhorted the believers to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (3:18).” (Note 5)
___
“Keeping the commandments” of the Lord is a typically Johannine way of speaking (cf. John 14:21; 1 John 3:21–24; 5:3). It does not connote the servile obedience of one who seeks to gain acceptance with God by observing the works of the law. It is rather the free and joyful obedience of one who has been liberated from the curse of the law and empowered by the Holy Spirit to fulfill that which formerly convicted and condemned him. In a versified sermon on “The Believer’s Principles concerning the Law and the Gospel,” the Scottish preacher Ralph Erskine affirmed both the evangelical freedom from the law and the Christian obedience to it:
The law’s a tutor much in vogue,
To gospel-grace a pedagogue;
The Gospel to the law no less
Than its full end for righteousness.
When once the fiery law of God
Has chas’d me to the gospel-road;
Then back unto the holy law
Most kindly gospel-grace will draw.
The law most perfect still remains,
And ev’ry duty full contains:
The Gospel its perfection speaks,
And therefore give whate’er it seeks.
A rigid master was the law,
Demanding brick, denying straw;
But when with gospel-tongue it sings,
It bids me fly, and gives me wings.’“(Note 6)
_______
Note(s):
1. Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nelson’s Quick Reference Topical Bible Index. Nashville, Tenn. : Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995; (Nelson’s Quick Reference), S. 49.
2. Swanson, James ; Nave, Orville: New Nave’s. Oak Harbor : Logos Research Systems, 1994
3. Kurian, George Thomas: Nelson’s New Christian Dictionary : The Authoritative Resource on the Christian World. Nashville, Tenn. : Thomas Nelson Pubs., 2001
4. Barclay, William, lecturer in the University of Glasgow (Hrsg.): The Letters to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians. Electronic ed. Philadelphia : The Westminster Press, 2000, c1975 (Logos Library System; The Daily Study Bible Series, Rev. Ed), S. 66.
5. Enns, Paul P.: The Moody Handbook of Theology. Chicago, Ill. : Moody Press, 1997, c1989, S. 125.
6. Kevan, Moral Law, 74–75.
April 30th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
The poem up above reminded me of this:
“John Berridge wrote:
Run, John, and work, the law commands,
Yet finds me neither feet nor hands;
But sweeter news the gospel brings,
It bids me fly and lends me wings!”
Charles Spurgeon, The Salt-cellars
April 30th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
Jim you said
So, I want to be clear that “they sit in the seat of Moses” is a little term of endearment I use, and not how SGM leaders would describe themselves.
But…… I did hear “Touch not God’s annointed” as something biblical concerning the leaders….yet I can’t find that reference myself. (do you know it?)
April 30th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
Who’s Anointing?
…Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm…
1 Chronicles 16:22; Psalm 105:15
*
Didn’t da Seege “anoint” himself? >snicker<
Hahahahahahahahahahaha!
In a little, ;~)
Sopy
April 30th, 2009 at 11:29 pm
David said something along the lines of not laying a hand on God’s anointed when Saul was pursuing him. This was his response to some of David’s companions suggesting that David kill Saul when he had the opportunity. David felt that it was only God’s call as to putting to death Saul. Even though Saul was sinning, David didn’t feel it was his right to murder Saul since Saul had been anointed king by God.
It should be noted that David was talking about physically touching God’s anointed and not about verbally saying something about him which David did on occasion.
I think it is questionable for someone in NT times to consider someone God’s anointed in the OT sense.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:05 am
Thank you, Sopy and Steve! And shame on Bible Gateway for letting me down!
;o)
And yes, it was used in our “church plant” as a reason to NOT bring correction to the sr. pastor.
sigh.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:21 am
1 Chronicles 16:22 (also Ps. 105:15) has been abused by many Charismatic preachers.
The contextual understanding of these terms, “anointed ones” and “prophets” (note the plural) refer to the patriarchs (see Ps. 105:9,10 “Abraham,” “Isaac” and “Jacob” ). And God made the covenant with them using the pronoun, “your” (v. 11), and then becomes “they” or “their” in verses 12-14.
Verse 14 ends with, “He permitted no man to oppress them, and He reproved kings for their sakes:” Note in NASB, the verse ends with a colon – indicating that verse 15 is connected with verse 14.
In this case, verse 15 proves what God did to preserve the patriarchs. The verse is stating the fact and the promise to the patriarchs. [For further comment, see Calvin's commentary on Psalm 105].
To apply this verse to all pastors is ludicrous, since no such principle is taught in the NT. However, NT does recognize authority in both civil and religious matters outside of the church, so believers are to show respect to them.
1. Civil authority (Rom. 13:1-7).
2. Religious authority (Acts 23:1-5). Here Paul recognized the authority of the high priest quoting Ex. 22:28, “Paul said, ‘I was not aware, brethren, that he was high priest; for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’” BUT this is far different than, “touch not mine anointed.”
May 1st, 2009 at 12:49 am
ESV has easier rendering of Psalm 105:14,15, “he (God) allowed no one to oppress them (patriarchs); he rebuked kings on their account, saying, ‘Touch not my anointed ones, do my prophets no harm.’”
Hope this clarifies it.
May 1st, 2009 at 5:59 am
The context of these passages (1 Chronicles 16:22; Ps. 105:15) is an Ark ceremony, the reference is to the patriarchs and prophets, i.e. this is scripture about Israel. In this context, ‘anointed’, has nothing to do with Christ’s Bride, the Church, which does not even exist at this point in time, around 1000 years before Christ was born in Bethlehem, Israel. (King David’s rule, circa 1010 to 970 B.C.)
–
“Let it be remembered how God protected the patriarchs in their unsettled condition. When they came strangers to Canaan and were sojourners in it, when they were few and might easily have been swallowed up, when they were continually upon the remove and so exposed, when there were many that bore them ill-will and sought to do them mischief, yet no man was suffered to do them wrong—not the Canaanites, Philistines, Egyptians. Kings were reproved and plagued for their sakes. Pharaoh was so, and Abimelech. They were the anointed of the Lord, sanctified by his grace, sanctified by his glory, and had received the unction of the Spirit. They were his prophets, instructed in the things of God themselves and commissioned to instruct others (and prophets are said to be anointed, 1 Ki. 19:16; Isa. 61:1); therefore, if any touch them, they touch the apple of God’s eye; if any harm them, it is at their peril, v. 19–22″ –Henry, Matthew: Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996, c1991, S. 1 Ch 16:7
May 1st, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Quizzler–
I thought anti-gnomians were people that had it out for little garden midgets?
May 1st, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Paul @ 4:36–hysterical. That reminds me that I cheated in fourth grade. I’m a former Mormon, so I’ll just abstain from Diet Coke for a couple of days.
May 1st, 2009 at 3:28 pm
So, from what Jim said
April 30th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
and
April 30th, 2009 at 7:56 pm,
and from others said also,does that mean that although SGM leaders/pastors haven’t SAID they sit in Moses’ seat, they DO hold to a Moses’ model, and they DO hold to a rather Old Testament “Touch Not Mine Anointed” view, which means that they could very well be identifying with a Law-based foundation?
The reason this is so very important is that Law-based, legalistic-based foundations mean they are under a curse and only bring death, and they teach/force their people to be the same.
It’s worse when there’s a little bit of truth and rightly-divided Scripture among all the junk — then it’s even harder to sift what’s false/rotten from the truth.
May 1st, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Beloved of God,
I think they are Moses model-I would doubt that as a movement you’d hear a lot of pastors pull the “mine anointed” card. I think defender’s pastor would be the exception.
SGM clearly has an oral tradition or “law”, and is legalistic. The thing is, I think every Christian I know (including myself) has some legalism in the mix. I don’t think we can say that a group of believers are under a curse. God doesn’t curse His kids
May 1st, 2009 at 4:19 pm
Beloved,
I am interested in your theory of curse.
Could you chapter and verse me on God cursing his people?
Thanks!
May 1st, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Aha. Good point.Still, Galations 3:10-11 is in the New Covenant: 10All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” 11Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.”Isn’t that like God saying, “Look, here are some ground rules of My household…. Don’t stick your fingers in the light socket and turn it on, or you will ‘be cursed’….”Not willingly, but saying, “That’s the way things are, and that’s the bottom line.”Yes, legalism is a constant battle in corporate and individual life.
May 1st, 2009 at 5:04 pm
Um, do I detect Priscilla and Aquila about to take me (”Apollos”) aside to instruct me further in the truth — in front of an international audience, no less?
Well, I do want to know the truth, and this has obviously been a stumbling block of a theological point to me no matter how much I’ve done to understand all this.
So, if my understanding is really in the realm of that which I’ve spoken against, I would like to know the truth.
Humbled….
May 1st, 2009 at 5:49 pm
Beloved of God-
No way Jose’..
Just adding my opinion.
May 1st, 2009 at 5:50 pm
JIm, you said”So, I want to be clear that “they sit in the seat of Moses” is a little term of endearment I use, and not how SGM leaders would describe themselves.”
So slander is acceptable if it is done as a term of endearment?
It begins to take on a life of it’s own, until 20 blogs later someone writes, I heard somewhere that Sovereign Grace teaches ……………
The tongue (or blog) ………..see the book of James for further comment.
May 1st, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Actually, you make an excellent point, and I have often pondered that verse in light of SGM.
I think you are right: God is telling his people: you want to play by the ‘rules.’ Good luck, you lose before the game is started.
Galatians 3, also, warns of turning back to the Law after finding grace:
“You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?
This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?
Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? Did you suffer so many things in vain–if indeed it was in vain?
So then, does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? ”
You startled me, Beloved, but I understand your point!
May 1st, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Paul,
Resist this overwhelming desire you have to pick a fight with me online.
I’ll eat your lunch, bro.
May 1st, 2009 at 6:01 pm
However……(couldn’t let it lie, sorry, I have to run out pretty soon…) Jesus often comments on his commitment to his people–promising he will lose none of the one that have been given to him.
John 6:37
Logically, the curse of God would imply no imputed rightousness…anyone under the curse you mention would be a legalist that never had entered into the saving relationship with Jesus based on grace.
Perhaps the lesson of the seed would help–there was seed in the parable that fell by the side of the road, and seemed to be growing, but it was never truly ‘planted.’ Many people are in the visible church, they ‘do’ ministry, they ’seem’ like a part of us, but no matter how often they hear about faith and grace, they harden their hearts to try harder, do more, to please God.
No one can see a heart.
May 1st, 2009 at 6:35 pm
Paul, Beloved, et al,
The thing that’s different about SGM — different from the folks in Galatians — is that these churches are filled with well-meaning people who believe that how they are living out their faith is doctrinally correct. They don’t realize they are legalists, so it’s tough to pin a label like that on them. I wouldn’t do it. It’s not that cut and dried. Even the pastors aren’t immune to the sort of deception that forms a legalistic heart within a human soul. As far as I can tell, and I’ve spoken to various SGM pastors about it, they sincerely believe what they are doing is a grace-filled work. I don’t know how, but it’s true.
The congregants also believe they’re under grace. They are probably as puzzled as anyone at why they don’t feel happy anymore (since joining the church). They assume (I know this to be true) that it’s because they are past that initial flurry of emotion and now digging deep into heart issues and the higher things of God now. It becomes almost a pride thing. We’re onto the “meat” now and off pablum. But no, that isn’t what’s happening at all! They have entered into bondage and misinterpreted it as maturity.
Paul, I don’t know you, but it sounds like you are still in a SG church. Just be aware that the things being preached need to be validated by you through a careful search of Scripture. These doctrines must adhere not only to chapter and verse but also to the overarching teachings of Jesus. Love God and your neighbor — on this hangs all the law and the prophets. The greatest of these is love. All else is a clanging cymbal. Speaking the truth in love… That’s a tough one, a scripture that’s been abused. How about we all stop focusing on the logs and splinters and focus on loving and serving one another — so that women like Sylvia are cared for in their crisis and not thrown to the wolves. That would be real maturity.
May 1st, 2009 at 9:14 pm
Freedom Fighter
Thanks! That was really well said!! You described the condition of my sg church to a tee. Again, thanks. There is something about seeing the thing named in black and white that helps make the truth more concrete. Before I found these sites, I just often thought that “it must be my imagination”(or my sinful heart). But sadly, no it’s not, This is really happening, the stories upon stories are just a reflection of even more stories upon stories that have been left unsaid …….. May the Lord rescue and heal his sheep, one by one.
Thanks for shining the light so succinctly!
Blessings,
Much Afraid
May 2nd, 2009 at 8:15 am
Dearest Much Afraid–
You know, beloved chid of God, you don’t have to meet with your pastors if you want to worship with another group of believers.
You don’t have to ‘leave well.’
You aren’t leaving the church. If you were leaving the CHURCH you would be going to a mosque or a Buddhist temple.
You are simply pulling your car into another parking lot filled with members of THE CHURCH on Sunday.
There is no scripture to support this endless navel gazing and groveling that SGM requires if you decide to join with another group of brothers and sisters on the sabbath to worship OUR God.
It gives away the fact that they consider themselves more important or better than the rest of the people for whom Jesus bled and died on the cross, for whom he burtst triumphant from the tomb.
How dare they impugn the rest of the Body of Christ? This is a dangerous stance for them to take.
THEY ARE THE ONES WHO SHOULD BE MUCH AFRAID, not you.
You are about to be renamed: Filled with MUCH joy. I wait with anticipation to hear sounds of delight from your direction, my friend!
Just go. They are manipulating you by having you come to meet with them. Be released!
Come and worship with us this sabbath–drive around for awhile until you find a place of freedom in which you are comfortable. “Church-shopping” is an amazingly fun thing, a rare chance to see all the shades and colors of the much-loved people of God.
May 2nd, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Reformed teacher,
We left “Bob the Builder Church” (Herein called BTBC) because we felt that we weren’t growing, and it was more or less a social club. We got together with the pastor and asked him to pray with us as we we were leaving to move on to another fellowship. He said “Nobody has ever done this. Members just stop coming and we have no idea what happened to them, thank you” He prayed for us, we left with no bitterness and even though today we still see that church as a social club, where sin, the cross, the blood of Christ are unmentionables ( we have listend to messages on line over the years) We still haven’t formed a BTBC Refuge website. We still love our old pastor and pray that someday he will begin preaching the Gospel rather than “it’s all about you”. (example – there was a member who was a stripper, and never approached about this because it would be seen as “judgemental”)
Church hopping is great until you find a church that you feel God wants you to stay in. (Reformed Teacher – I agree with you on that) Paul wrote to the Church in Ephesus, Galatia etc and even went so far as to lay down rules for church government. Why would he waste his time doing that if he didn’t want a “local church” If Much Afraid wants to leave, then leave. The diffence between a church and a cult is that cults make it hard to leave. Much Afraid, leave whenever you want, but if you don’t tell your pastor (s) why, then you will be robbing them of the reason you are leaving. They need to know. You may be right – they are just “human, and sinners” correct? What if 50 members felt the same way and no one talked to the pastor or sent an email on to the pastor that gave oversite to your pastor. Then the problem would never be solved.
I’ll give you an example from our experience.
Years ago Pastor X asked me to talk to my wife about her “innapproprite dress”. I asked if it was immodest and he said “No, it is just loud with purples, neon colors and to attention grabbing” We asked Pastor Y to come join the conversation. Pastor Y pulled pastor X into another room for a few minutes. Then pastor X came out and asked us to forgive him for his legalism. If we had just left in a tizzy, and not confronted that legalism, it never would have given pastor X that opportunity to grow.
We’ve been members of Metro for 22 years, and have never been silent when we feel something was coming off as extra-Biblical. We talked against the “territorial demon theology” that was all the rage 15 or so years ago. Today it is ancient history. Our talking to the pastors about our problems with that theology, coupled with others voicing their beliefs may have been the reason why.
Once a year we visit churches in our neighborhood for a month to see what God is doing on our side of town (we live 25 minutes from our building, and when a new neighbor moves in, or co worker, we want to be able to point them to a neighborhood church with sound doctrine) We have seen all sorts of heresy and some great churches in the years we have done this. We have formed wonderful friendships with some of the bros and sisters in these churches. And, yes, we have seen heresy (Like – “Jesus is just ‘One of many Ways”) and have never told our neighbors to check that church out, because of that heresy.
Freedom fighter, thanks for the kind words, but I don’t see it (Maybe, I am “blind” in your eyes) I know that it is His kindness that leads to repentence.
I know that without out pastros loving counsel we would have divorced years ago.
Our leadership has stood beside us and wept when we wept and rejoiced when we rejoiced. You speak of “Speaking the truth in love… ” I am glad they spoke the truth to me about how I wasn’t loving and leading my wife and family. I could have gotten offended and left but I stayed through those painful times and saw how wrong I was.
(If anyone has seen “Fireproof” I WAS Kirk Cameron’s role. Watching that movie was like living a nightmare as I got to see what I really looked like. It was ugly, but in my own sin, I didn’t see it. I have given my wife permission to call a few different wives in the church if I start traveling that road, and permission for their husbands (my friends) to “Speak the truth in love” to me.
If that is legalism, than I am a legalist. Decades later, I love my wife more than ever and she is my best friend and lover.
Sorry everyone, I just woke up and realize that I have rambled on (to quote Led Zepelin) and most of you fell asleep in my first paragraph, three hours ago.
Much love, in Christ,
Paul
May 2nd, 2009 at 6:42 pm
Hi Paul my brother!
Much Afraid has been ‘leaving’ the church for awhile…I suspect you have a different situation at your church than many here.
Of course, you are right, it is always good to speak honestly to each other.
But it is wrong for a pastor team to continue to ask for more meetings, to accuse a brother/sister of wrong motives in leaving….I don’t think you experiencd this.
I’m enjoying your postings!
May 2nd, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Hi RT & Paul
RT, Thank you for your kind words,, you are about the 6 or 7th person that has said, it’s okay to just go, but for me it’s a bit more complicated because of some family stuff that I’m not free to say in this forum and also because I spent alot of years in pdi (early 90’s) - I want to do this in a way that pleases Jesus, but I also want to be protected by Jesus in the process, please pray to that end. Thank you
Paul, I hear you as well, and I want to affirm that not everything I experianced was bad, many thing in fact were very good especially in the early years before cj shut down the spirit, But I saw and experianced many (most) of the very same things that these good folks have said over and over again in this blog setting. And though I have experianced a few particularly grievous and hurtful things at different times in sg, many of the people here have experianced and endured much, much worst then I.
That’s why this forum is helpful, and I know it’s been said before, but it allows people to tell thier experiances, and yes, there is hurt and there is anger and there is confusion and frustration, but it’s thier stories! People need a safe place to tell thier stories, it’s a key part of being healed and regaining perspective! For those that have ears to hear, the hearts of the folks that post here come thru much louder then the particular verbage they might use, and thier hearts are hurting and wounded; but then because God will not ever abandon His sheep,, ever,, as you read further posts, you see hearts begining to heal!! There is a poster named Juli that put up on her website journals entrys from when she first came out and they were gut-wrenching to read, and now she is one who strengthens God sheeps in many venues.
Sorry I rambled on. But whatever concerns you have about sites like these, please see with you heart that for this season anyway,, this is a context that seems to be helping some people recover thier hope,,, Myself included. My prayer is that there would be a day when sites like these would be obsolete because God’s people will have learned to love like Jesus.
Blessings to all who post here,
Much Afraid
May 2nd, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Hi again, Paul,
I have been thinking about what you wrote: “Why would he waste his time doing that if he didn’t want a “local church?”
Could you define “local church” for me? Some people I know would not move to a city in which there is not an SGM church, since they couldn’t be part of a “local church.” There are no believing churches in some American cities?
Then, you said, “What if 50 members felt the same way and no one talked to the pastor or sent an email on to the pastor that gave oversite to your pastor. ”
Have you read the story of the people from Chesapeake and Gene Emerson’s reaction to their pleas?
May 2nd, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Yes, Paul, I’m afraid what you said above was quite naive, although I’m happy to hear that nothing bad has happened to you in your tenure at your SG church. It’s possible that you are in the inner circle and thus immune to what we’re talking about. There are those at the church in Chesapeake who I’ve spoken to privately who absolutely cannot see what is to me so plain. I suspect that’s because they are in the “in” group or because they resemble closely the style and manner of a classic member of an SGM church. I was a sold out, God-fearing, Jesus-loving, mild-mannered, easily wounded Christian from Dallas, Texas, who had attended meetings with James Robison, Robert Tilton (ick), Howard Konatzer, Bob Mumford, Kenneth Copeland, Larry Lea, the list goes on. I was not new to a life of faith, in other words, nor did I have any glaring sin areas. But I was artistic, wore darker makeup than is typical, dressed in more modern (though always modest) styles than usual for a SG woman, put my daughter in a private kindergarten instead of homeschooling her, etc. In other words, I stuck out like a sore thumb.
As long as you respond with humility to any correction brought to you (in your case, the correction was much needed but this isn’t always true), you are safe. I had just earned a Master’s in Theology, too, so I didn’t sit quietly at care group when something didn’t mesh with what I knew of the Word of God. I don’t think they were accustomed to that. For whatever reason, I was not “in.” I could see others getting wooed but our family was frequently left out in the cold. I think in a healthy church there will be people of all types. All Christians in varying places in their walk of faith, but not carbon copies of each other. Not all “preppy” or conservative, for example. I met someone I had known at the Chesapeake church several years after I left and she walked up to me and said, “I see you’re still going to Southside (as it was then called).” I said, “As a matter of fact, no. What made you say that?” She pointed to my hair ribbon and said, “That’s how they all fix their hair.” Which was funny because I hadn’t worn my hair that way for years — but it was very telling.
About the never being silent when something was extrabiblical, I spoke up many times about certain doctrines that I felt were not part of the pure Gospel but side issues and a matter of preference rather than commandments and was “straightened out” through close examination of isolated scriptures and detailed explanations of very sketchy, picky things that the chosen scriptures barely supported. When I went to my Greek/Hebrew interlinear text, the scriptures supported their ideas even less.
These other churches, the ones people leave without going to a blog to tell their stories and reach out for healing and companionship, are probably healthier than SG churches in that the people who leave are like you when you left your other church. When you leave a SG church, you leave all your friends as if you’re heading to Siberia. They will not speak to you, nor will they allow their children to play with yours anymore because you have left the “true” faith, the “hard” walk, the “narrow” way, THE church. They no longer feel safe with you because your child might not always look them in the eye and say the right things, the prescribed responses of a child of SG. Because of the STRONG sense of community that is fostered in SG churches — and I think that’s something they do well though perhaps for the wrong reasons — once you leave, you are completely out of the tight-knit circles you once considered lifelong friendships and bonds that would never be broken. It’s getting better, I think, but when we left many years ago that was a huge problem and a deep source of woundedness for many, many women participating on this blog.
I’ve gone on too long, but I have real concerns for everyone who is still in this denomination. I hope and pray that change will come, but meanwhile, please be watchful.
May 3rd, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Much afraid, how did CJ “shut down the spirit”?
Reformed teacher – a local church is a body of believers that gather together to worship God, study His word and live in such a way as to draw all men unto Him. Local churches come in all shapes and size – main focus is that they believe in “Christ, and Him crucified” and risen again. If I moved to Muckadoo Alabama I would look for a church that met those qualifications – could be Baptist, could be Non denom, doesn’t have to be SGM.
No I haven’t heard about the story of the people from Chesapeake and Gene Emerson’s reaction to their pleas.
Freedom fighter – What did I say above that was “naïve” ?
Was it:
1) I know that without out pastors loving counsel we would have divorced years ago?
2) And, yes, we have seen heresy (Like – “Jesus is just ‘One of many Ways”)?
3) Church hopping is great until you find a church that you feel God wants you to stay in?
4) The difference between a church and a cult is that cults make it hard to leave?
5) I love my wife more than ever and she is my best friend and lover?
6) We’ve been members of Metro for 22 years, and have never been silent when we feel something was coming off as extra-Biblical?
Out of all that you wrote to me – this one line caused me to laugh out loud.
“It’s possible that you are in the inner circle”
Nope. Paula home schooled our oldest son through 5th to 8th grade, after that he went to public school. Our youngest went to public school his whole life, and is now on his way into pharmacy school, while his wife gets her doctorate in physical therapy (they joined Metro Life church on their own). My wife was a model and an account coordinator for a large cosmetics firm out of Paris (while she home schooled). Due to breast cancer 15 years ago, she has only been able to work with the company very part time. She is now a Chaplain’s assistant one night a week with me at the Emergency Room I work in.
We are not home group leaders, pastors or in leadership of any kind. We are knocking at the door of leadership all the time with questions and concerns, and are not afraid of what they will feel about us. (We fear God, not men) We have been loved through breast cancer, cervical cancer, a compound fracture that left Paula in a wheelchair for a year, a tumor the size of a grapefruit that caused her to lose her left adrenal gland and part of her pancreas, and marriage and family problems so heart wrenching they are too private to post on the internet. The whole church over 20+ years (not just leadership) has served us through a ton of pain, physical and spiritual, and we in turn look for ways to extend that love anywhere we go –in or outside of the four walls of our building.
And lastly F.F: You don’t see this sentence as a bit proud? “There are those at the church in Chesapeake who I’ve spoken to privately who absolutely cannot see what is to me so plain.” It is only you who can discern the truth, and all others are blind? Sure, I have heard of and seen people follow leadership off cliffs, but I would never say that it was me that had the truth and all others are blind. You sound like you are still carrying the heavy handed Mumford days with you wherever you go.
Paula and I worked with an ex- Jehovah Witness group for years. Sadly, they had been burned in a REAL cult and never would allow themselves to be a part of another church again. They all just enjoyed sitting around talking about the pain they suffered under JW leadership. They could never move beyond that.
I do hope you all are not an internet version of that group and that you have found new homes.
In Christ, Paul
May 3rd, 2009 at 5:28 pm
“Biblical manhood and womanhood is the life-transforming effect of the gospel on full display. When a church teaches, practices, and honors gender distinctions determined by our good and wise God, the gospel will advance. But this will only happen where there are humble and courageous pastors who lead every member and ministry of the church by personal example and with strategic pastoring.”
http://www.cbmw.org/Blog
It’s really hard to believe, from this side of the SGM machine, that CJ would actually claim that the gospel will advance if people follow his rules. THAT is the height of arrogance.
Definitely not a man to follow–anywhere.
May 3rd, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Freedom,
Bless’ins…
HowDee,
Yas did’n't even warm da chair… (he he)
Yas come back reals soon, Ya hear?
In a little, ;~)
Sopy
May 3rd, 2009 at 8:04 pm
This is what I felt was naive, Paul: “What if 50 members felt the same way and no one talked to the pastor or sent an email on to the pastor that gave oversite to your pastor.”
Paul, you don’t know how many people have tried to explain to their pastors why they are leaving only to be told they (the leavers) have heart issues or pride or somesuch. These pastors are not willing to receive correction from their flock. From CJ, maybe, but not from the people they shepherd. It’s one thing to veer a little off course when you’re still near the harbor — easily fixed with a slight turn of the rudder — but it’s quite an ordeal to fix a wrong turn when you’re way out in the ocean, floundering in the gigantic waves. You (proverbial you) need a compass. The congregation or at least a board of elders can be that compass.
Of course that’s a generalization on my part. These churches aren’t all the same, but so many are that it’s enough to warrant a couple of much-needed blogs for people to heal. And yes, folks need to heal here just like the Jehovah’s Witnesses you minister to because they feel they have either been duped into believing less than the true Gospel and wasted precious years beating themselves up over their sin instead of experiencing abundant life in Christ or they have been harshly reprimanded “in love” over something that wasn’t really a problem and are desperately hurt. Or in some cases, like the poor family whose child was molested, they, the victims, are the ones accused of having “heart issues” (who wouldn’t?) and the perpetrator is restored to a position serving in a three-year-old classroom.
I think, Paul, that maybe it would benefit you to go to the archived messages here and read some of the stories we’re talking about before you judge us or defend your denomination so vehemently. Maybe your particular church is fine at the moment, and that is a fantastic thing! But we have seen a steady decline into legalism and an overfocus on indwelling sin that is so different from any other Christian denomination that it appears to us to border on cultishness. The very sense of community that I so valued and felt a part of disintegrated before my eyes when I left — and not in that typical way that you sort of over time stop hanging around with the old crowd when you leave a church. It was abrupt and horrifyingly painful (though not anymore). That is what happens when you leave a cult and also when you leave a movement like the Mennonites. Mennonites have been known to purposely shun those who leave in an effort to woo them back. They withold community and friendship and familial love to try to get people to return. But this was different. It was as if we had never been friends with these people. Our phone calls were not returned. No one showed up at my baby shower. My boys cried at the loss of their two best buddies, and I had nothing to say to them in answer except to reassure them that we would find new friends at the new church (which we did). We didn’t leave angrily or do anything to warrant a total shunning, so to this day I don’t understand why it happened.
I wasn’t trying to be prideful when I said I had spoken to people who are still in SGM churches and they simply can’t see what is plain to me. I don’t have a corner on truth, by any means. I was trying to get at why they can’t see it when I said that and I think in some cases it’s because of their being such a good fit or perhaps being so agreeable when corrected. Not that I was not agreeable. I was relatively invisible at my church — the pastor didn’t even want an exit interview. When we asked for one, he told us to just tell the Care Group leader we were leaving and let him release us officially. (Steve Shank was our pastor.) I don’t know why people like you and those I spoke to via email can’t see what we have all seen. Maybe it just hasn’t happened to you yet. I’ll tell you one thing — the reunions I’ve had recently with friends who left the Chesapeake church late last year have been such a tremendous blessing to me, a source of healing for me, and frankly, a miracle from God that I didn’t ever expect. I had put this church experience from 13 years ago far behind me until my daughter found an old friend on Facebook last year. I’m so very thankful that the Lord has fulfilled my desire for restoration with my old friends, and I look forward to the day we will ALL worship together before the throne.
I think if your church is healthy and doing well and just what you have needed for 22 years it’s a great thing. But what happens when a church within your denomination has problems? Nothing. Because they don’t have elders to keep them on track and accountable. It’s a difficult thing not having to be accountable to anyone in your congregation, only to the apostolic team and God. When we saw things that concerned us such as the shift after the Toronto Blessing toward disallowing the gifts of the Spirit to be a focus of ministry in SGM and told the Care Group leader about our concerns, nothing was done. There is no accountability. It’s like CJ is the pope and he speaks on behalf of God. But church polity is defined and laid out pretty well in the Bible. Probably because God did not intend for there to be a lone ranger at the top. I guess it’s working at your church, so great. But please remember to pray for the other churches, the troubled ones. And continue to keep your pastor informed when you see error because it sounds like he listens to you.
May 3rd, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Thanks, doulos, for this post.
You said,
“When we become a Christian – by hearing the message of the Gospel, we experience initial joy and love of the Gospel. But we do not habitually apply the Gospel everyday in our relationship with God.”
I am struck by the difference in SGM’s version of “applying the gospel” and what you describe here.
You are right. Legalism is prevalent as is license. I’ve been in contrasting situations where the leadership’s idea of Christian maturity couldn’t be farther apart.
In SGM and other overly authoritative churches that lean more toward legalism, maturity is measured by how carefully you follow their “right doctrine”, much of which is not based solely on Scripture, but on their unique extrapolations of it. Intimacy with Christ and the doctrine of the priesthood of every believer are often sacrificed to “serving and being a joy to your pastor” and “submitting to your authority” for “they stand in the very stead of God.”
Other churches lean more toward license. In these churches, anything goes. Maturity is measured by how non-judgemental you are or how well you “flow in the Spirit” with little regard to any type of order or Scriptural backing.
Now to me (post-PDI and post hyper-charismatic), maturity in Christ is about abiding in the Vine. It’s about intimacy and gut-wrenching honesty before the Lord, trusting Him to prune here and encourage growth there. It’s about staying connected to Him, His Spirit AND His Word. From the legalistic side, it’s like flying joyfully with His Wind, not like spinning plates or being driven by a man-made rod. From the license side, it’s like holding onto a well-established, deep rooted tree not grasping shallow, easily uprooted sprouts.
May 3rd, 2009 at 8:14 pm
This is so strange to me:
“You sound like you are still carrying the heavy handed Mumford days with you wherever you go.”
Because that is exactly what we all here at Refuge feel that SGM is doing — following the old shepherding movement’s ways!
I guess it’s because communication is limited online. You couldn’t see the inflection in my voice…
May 3rd, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Go, Gracie! Very well put and exactly what I was feebly trying to say in my typically longwinded fashion!
May 3rd, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Gracie, this is an outstanding paragraph:
Wow. Well said.
~John
protestantknight@gmail.com
May 3rd, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Paul
You said: “Much afraid, how did CJ “shut down the spirit”? In the late 90’s our church was enjoying a renewal of the holy spirit in our midst. The regular Wednesday meetings were called “Holy Spirit: Move Among us” – The Spirit was in our midst and it was a powerful time of intimacy with our God. At that time we were singing alot of Vineyard songs as the Vineyard church was also in the midst of a move of the Spirit. My understanding is that it was determined from the higher ups (CJ et al) that they felt the Vineyard move of the Spirit was taking a left turn, and it was told to us from the pulpit (I was there) that rather then have the church also take a left turn, They would rather err on the side of caution. And so they immediately stopped the mid-week “move among us” mtgs, We stopped singing Vineyard songs,, and the subtle shift into legalism, self focused sin-introspection became more the norm. CJ who was a regular speaker at out church chnaged from preaching out of a variety of texts to only preaching the cross , also in and around the same block of time the larry tomzack separation letter went around.
Hope that helps answer your question
Much Afraid
May 3rd, 2009 at 9:39 pm
Much Afraid, the same thing happened at our PDI church. An announcement was made that they were going to “err on the side of caution” and I remember a woman being touched by the power of the Holy Spirit with laughter and then being asked to leave the service and go sit in the hallway. In an environment like that, it’s not surprising that the powerful visitations of God would end. They were no longer welcomed. I think, though, that it must be hard to be charismatic AND reformed. You don’t see that too often, do you?
May 3rd, 2009 at 9:45 pm
FF
Perhaps we were in the same place? As I recall ,, it was the “holy laughter” that was the demarcation line in our church that put an end to what was a very sweet, powerful and transforming time with the Lord.
Sigh…
May 3rd, 2009 at 10:41 pm
Thanks for the explanation from your perspective, Much Afraid.
I went to Toronto, and a small group of us met every Saturday night in one home and had amazing times of intimate worship that would last late into the night. I don’t remember CJ walking into the livingroom as we worshipped and command us to stop. I just remember that as quietly as the move of God’s Spirit came, His power moved on.
(Side Note: I went to Toronto to see for myself if it was manufactured Hokum like you see on PTL and much of Charismania on “Christian TV”, or if it was a real move of God’s Holy Spirit. I truly expected it to be alot of what Hank Hanagraff called as mass hysteria, but was pleasantly surprised to find it to be real – not to say that everything was on the up and up. I had told Paula that I didn’t see how an Omnipresent God would allow Himself to be “stuck” in one place, but then I remembered the situation where God told Abraham that He was not going with Moses and those stiff necked Israelites and I saw that God could move in power wherever He wanted)
There were some who would drive to Melbourne, looking for the experience, and then on to Brownsville. Vineyard Toronto was even told by John Wimber to stop, but they left Vineyard. I wonder after the Great awakening if there wasn’t a scapegoat to blame for the end of that time, but I don’t believe that we can manufacture a move of the Holy Spirit by singing particular songs.
You mentioned “sin-introspection” beginning AFTER the move of the Holy Spirit. I saw it beginning in the MIDDLE of the move, as many of us were brought to repentance and before the cross anew. Don’t get me wrong, I would love to have had it continue on and on and I know if God chooses we may experience another revival like The Great Awakening , Toronto etc, but I don’t believe that God will ever be boxed.
I am sorry that you are having such a difficult time where you are at Much Afraid.
In Christ, Paul
May 3rd, 2009 at 11:04 pm
For the record, Paul goes to one of the more charismatic SGCs. As recently as 05 they experienced “holy laughter” in their youth or singles meetings.
May 3rd, 2009 at 11:40 pm
Unfortunately, being in one of the more charismatic SGM’s will not necessarily protect you from authoritarian abuses…
May 3rd, 2009 at 11:46 pm
Just out of curiosity… what was your journey to Reformed faith? For example, in my case: I was saved in Charismatic background church (Arminian) and then later embraced Reformed faith without becoming a cessationist.
May 4th, 2009 at 12:34 am
“And lastly F.F: You don’t see this sentence as a bit proud? “There are those at the church in Chesapeake who I’ve spoken to privately who absolutely cannot see what is to me so plain.” It is only you who can discern the truth, and all others are blind? Sure, I have heard of and seen people follow leadership off cliffs, but I would never say that it was me that had the truth and all others are blind. You sound like you are still carrying the heavy handed Mumford days with you wherever you go.”
Amazing.
Is it just me, or does this paragraph start out with an accusation of judgement (pride) and ends up with an uncharitable judement?
One thing I didn’t see until I was “outside” – that it is “gossip/slander” to pronounce such opinions or judgements on someone in the leadership of SGM but perfectly ok and even common for SGM’ers to exercise their judgemental freedom on those they see as outside or inferior. At least that’s my observation. Or judgement.
I did it from the inside, and received when I was outside. both to my sorrow.
May 4th, 2009 at 12:45 am
Hi Paul!
Guess why CJ didn’t shut you guys down? He didn’t know about it, I bet.
Read some other posts here and on survivors and you will know these beloved people more deeply.
Glad to have you in the conversation!
May 4th, 2009 at 8:23 am
I think Paul just misunderstood my intent when he said that about Bob Mumford. Since we don’t know one another really, he couldn’t know that I’m sort of a crusader against that type thing and also pretty mild-mannered and shy in person.
Paul, I’m glad you’re here and I’m glad to hear that your church stayed more charismatic than the rest. Not that I value charismatic churches more than others, but it was so sad to me when they veered off into ultra-reformed doctrine in Chesapeake. I was raised Episcopalian — in a charismatic Episcopal church. It can be tricky to move toward a denomination or doctrine and remain charismatic. Most charismatic churches I’ve been to have been nondenominational (never been to an Assembly of God church). I think somewhere in that move toward the Reformation is when things went awry in SGM. You can read the history of the movement somewhere on this site. I don’t remember where. Jim, can you guide us? A clear move away from/break with the more charismatic element took place when Lou Engel left, I think.
Sometimes waves or “anointings” come and go — and God often initiates them by drawing people to repentance and intercession first. But this time there was a clear shutting down. I got the impression that they didn’t want it anymore. Being in Virginia Beach where CBN is headquartered, there were a lot of folks who were distinctly charismatic. I think a wave of folks left at that time because the church was headed in a direction they didn’t feel was appropriate. Now we’re seeing the fruit of some of that. There’s also good stuff going on, I’m sure. Deep friendships, support systems, even the continual cleansing from sin that comes from that focus on searching your heart. Other churches don’t perhaps do enough of that. But I think it became an “idol” when it took center stage.
May 4th, 2009 at 8:34 am
Also — among the other charismatic churches in the area surrounding the Chesapeake church, people knew that Sovereign Grace had a reputation of being ingrown and exclusive. It was known that if you went there, you didn’t ordinarily fellowship with people outside the church. I don’t know WHY that is, I just know that we all knew about it. And it made us feel that we were so second class in their eyes. From the Vineyard church where I went to the charismatic presbyterian church and others in between. If, Paul, there is nothing “off” going on in these SGM churches, how is it that surrounding churches that are healthy and strong all know that this one is “different” and exclusionary? The humble thing (and if humility were easy, we’d all be so very humble!) would be for CJ et al to step back, visit some other churches, study polity, pray and fast, and learn from their mistakes. It seemed like such a good thing to build strong families and a strong sense of community, but it didn’t work. So now we do the hard work of rebuilding from the ground up — maybe with your church, Paul, as the example of how things should have gone in the other ones?
May 4th, 2009 at 10:36 am
FF said-
I think somewhere in that move toward the Reformation is when things went awry in SGM. You can read the history of the movement somewhere on this site. I don’t remember where. Jim, can you guide us? A clear move away from/break with the more charismatic element took place when Lou Engel left, I think.
If that info is on here, I didn’t write it, and have no idea where it might be.
May 4th, 2009 at 11:18 am
I would very much disagree with you Freedom Fighter about the issues stemming from the move towards being reformed and less charismatic. I think moving towards being reformed would solve most the issues, the problem is that they only moved towards being reformed in name -and i guess in the belief in Calvinism, and are still holding onto some charismatic beliefs that are keeping them in trouble. The church was very in the shepherding movement while it was very charismatic, and it many of the issues that have been discussed and abuse problems that have happened have happened forever in CLC, during pre reformed times. In fact, at least at CLC in the community, the spin on CLC to the community is they used to have problems and be cultic, but now they have become reformed and are a lot better. I used to say that myself. No I do think they have gotten a lot better, and the joke at CLC is that some people are in the cult and some aren’t.. Those who are in the cult tend to be those who are more legalistic, authoritarian, tend towards gothardism, and more charismatic. Those that aren’t generally are those who came form Presbyterian/reformed Baptist churches and are drawn by the “real sharing” and style of worship.
The main issues that has been identified with SGM is their church polity, and that is the main part of church belief that is a holdover from their more charismatic beliefs and is something that no real reformed church would tolerate. I always was dismayed by this belief and how the church had changed in beliefs when more information was learned, remember when the church was started CJ, self admittedly, knew nothing about the Bible and there was never/is never much theological training among the pastors. With Purswell and others coming in and having some theological standing, men who could actually read the Bible in the Greek and Hebrew and had been taught theology and bible doctrines, the beliefs changed somewhat to match what they saw as Scripture teaching instead of what they had done/felt./ learned from experience. The main exception in this change was church government., and that is one of the biggest roots in their issues, especially related to abuse.
Now this is not to say that being Charismatic causes abuse issues, or that being reformed makes a church perfect, I don’t believe that at all. However I do think that to say that “I think somewhere in that move toward the Reformation is when things went awry in SGM” is in my opinion completely untrue and sort of backwards. The holding on to the charismatic belief about church government is what has made things awry.
In regards to the comment about when they went less Charismatic I always have seen a part of that when Schmidt was kicked out of CLC and the church somewhat split and Immanuel’s was formed with a lot of the very charismatic people.
May 4th, 2009 at 11:19 am
Someone gave a brief overview of the entire history of PDI/SGM at one point. I can’t find it, though.
As I was looking for it, I came across Canary’s two-part story from June 11/12 2008 in the Your Story section. Canary, your experiences mirrored mine pretty closely. I think it provides a good explanation for Paul that will help him understand what we’re talking about. You have to scroll down a little bit, Paul, within the Your Story section.
May 4th, 2009 at 11:35 am
Sorry, Presbyterian, I didn’t mean to ruffle your feathers at all! One of my favorite churches is a charismatic Presbyterian church, so combining the two can work. I was talking about “when” it happened, not why when I said “I think somewhere in that move toward the Reformation is when things went awry in SGM.” In our SGM church, Reformed doctrine and authoritarian abuse went hand in hand. Read Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God and you’ll get the idea. What I think may have happened — and your post REALLY enlightened me on this — is that the lack of theological education and training about what Reformed Doctrine really is got them into trouble when they made the switch. They took Jonathan Edwards and John Calvin and ran with them before they studied them in depth (I think — I have no real idea what happened but am hypothesizing!)
Maybe it was neither charismatics nor reformers. This was all most likely caused by deception. We have a common enemy on the prowl who takes great delight in placing scales over eyes and convincing people of their guilt and sinfulness and unworthiness. It’s a short walk from there to where SGM now sits. And that can happen anywhere to anyone at any church. I think authoritarian structures are welcomed by certain personality types (type As who like to “git ‘er done”) and they wound other personality types — those who are fragile and frail and have already received some hard knocks in life (That’s me — broken home, abused, many losses.)
May 4th, 2009 at 11:38 am
I know Jonathan Edwards was “Great Awakening” and not a Reformer like Calvin, Luther, or Zwingli. SGM lumps him in with the others, so I did as well.
May 4th, 2009 at 11:55 am
“A clear move away from/break with the more charismatic element took place when Lou Engel left.”
The issue for Lou, as I understand it, was that he, “grew tired of asking permission
to do what he felt God was calling him to do.”
May 4th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Reformed Teacher asked me what a local church was. I did some more searching and found this on David Powlison’s blog (you know David, he’s afriend of Sovereign Grace)
Jonathan Leeman presents a Theological Critique of MultiSite Churches. It is a very good read, but more interesting to me was Leeman’s discussion of what constitutes a church:
Leeman goes on to explain:
May 4th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Freedom Fighter you wrote “I think it provides a good explanation for Paul that will help him understand what we’re talking about. You have to scroll down a little bit, Paul, within the Your Story section.”
Freedom Fighter- thank you for opening my eyes,
Thank you for sending me back in time to see that this anger and bitterness is still continuing on after all this time.
If all of you now belong to new churches, ask your pastors what they think of your posts and the amount of time you spend slandering a church of people you once loved and together served God .
There is much in the News these days about people whose lives have been taken over by blogs, twittering and twootering. They have no physical face to face communication. I see much of that here and for that reason and the fact that I can no longer sit back and read slander after slander of men and women that I love (the same way you would not frequent a blog that called your spouse a whore) and serve a God of Love, I can no longer stomach the bile and hatred on this site.
Move on with your lives. You are free now, you have found (I hope) a church that you can flourish in. Only Satan is served by such devisiveness.
Paul
May 4th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Paul,
You’re right about one thing, that was your final post. You been calling my guests bitter for a week, and none of it had seen the light of day. I guess you won’t rest until you’ve said it on the internet, so there it is.
Paul thinks we are bitter slanderers.
Now back to our regular scheduled program…
May 4th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Hey Paul,
With your new found freedom, perhaps you could fire away at John MacArthur.
He makes a great point -
When 1 Timothy 5:20 says, “Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all,” it is talking about elders in particular. Those in public ministry must be rebuked publicly when their sin is repeated, and public, and confirmed by multiple witnesses.
http://www.shepherdsfellowship.....px?ID=4174
May 4th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
“Now back to our regular scheduled program…”
Laughing out loud – literally!
The freedom to judge others and assign sin (to those outside SGM) amazes me. And the fact that someone’s questions, or dissents, or honorable disagreement is ALWAYS sin.
I should be used to it, but I’m not. go figure.
May 4th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Paul,
Sorry brother, but only in SGM is truth considered slander.
May 4th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Does Paul have any idea how angry and unforgiving he sounds?
May 4th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Hello Paul,
I know people in YOUR SOVEREIGN GRACE MINISTRY CHURCH.
They are not nice, they judge,and they are mean seclusive christians. I ”ran” into someone from Metro the other day. I wished I could have video’d the conversation for youtube.
If Danny Jones, or my buddy Benny was reading, I wanted to say…good job! You boys have taught your men well on how to look down on the hurting….
I ran into a woman the other day. Across from a plate of brownies. The years had worn her down. She exlained to me that someone had told her Jesus loves her and she gave her heart to Christ and began going to this such and such church…lets call it Bob the Builder Church just for illustration purposes…She said this took place IN Victoria Secret and now she is trying to find her way and meet new friends. She said she loves her job at Victoria Secret and that they pay her well. I could not believe what I was hearing and KNEW THAT WOULD NEVER TAKE PLACE AT SOVEREIGN GRACE CHURCH WHERE IT IS A SIN TO EVEN LOOK AT THE AD. Now I do not condone lust, I just know there is a type of unbeliever that SOVEREIGN GRACE MINISTRY FOLK SIMPLY LOOK DOWN ON. Maybe, just maybe the ”stripper” from your social club church was raped, WHO KNOWS PAUL, maybe it was her dad……we don’t know, why this woman chooses to strip, SHE’S DIFFERENT. Maybe PAUL, for once she just needed to be loved first, maybe for along time. MAYBE, she needed to see what true love in the body of Christ really looks like for a while to grow and to trust this one we call LORD. MAYBE that stripper was my sister, and I was praying for years that she would someday just walk into a church, and then theres you PAUL, you want to CLEAN THE GIRL UP. Make her feel even more ashamed of her poor choices, oh yeah,,,,and lets get the leadership involved. Sometimes it takes those social activities to help us get to know one another….I know, I know you don’t have time for that….
I felt sad when I read your posts Paul. I hope of all the ways you brag and defend your church, that in the next 20 years, you will personally learn how to love. The way Christ does…
May 4th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
To Whom the Son sets free, …they are free indeed!
Father,
Forgive Paul Balluff, for he knows not what he does.
I forgive you, Paul Balluff, may God have mercy on your soul.
Tell your dribble to Bree, whom the Lord loves. If you had you way She an her four babies would have nothing.
You hurt our dear friend, Freedom, whom the Lord also loves.
She tried to help you…
May 4th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
I hope that no one will take this nonsense seriously. We all know that we are bitter slanderers in sgm-land. The posts that I did not release were full of the same junk.
I thought I’d let our new friend show his true colors before directing his future posts into spam purgatory.
Just let the venom roll off your back. Life is really too short to give a rip about what some zombie thinks.
May 4th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Gee….I wonder how Paul is able to recognize bitterness?
Hmmm.
Jim, you crack me up. Your 2:17 was spot on.
May 4th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Paul, You and I know each other. We have for a long time. My family and I used to go to Metro, and now we a part of another SGC in Florida. The SGM we all fell in love with, and wanted to serve and give our lives to no longer exists. It is dead. No longer should we defend and protect an organization (or the men that run it), but give our lives to our Lord and His service. SGM is not “the church of people” you say this site (and others like it) are slandering. The people of SGCs need help. They need leaders who are interested in caring for them, and not THE ORGANIZATION first. The leadership (and most pastors) of SGM will do whatever it takes to protect and defend SGM, AT ANY COST. The cost of peoples’ lives, marriages, relationships, etc., are expendible to the greater good of THE ORGANIZATION. SGM is their god in too many “apostles” eyes, and not our Lord Jesus. I know this from personal experience. My name on here is what me and my family have been characterized as by SGM. Please stop and think about who you serve. I thought for a long time my family and I were serving God first, but it wasn’t that way at all. SGM was an idol to me and idols don’t like it when people try to expose them. They rear their ugly little heads and fight to stay an idol.
May 4th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Paul, we know each other from our church. I know you as much more bold and intelligent than your posts, which I have been reading now since they started (following this site for a while, as do others you know), sounded. Don’t choose the easy way and just accuse everyone here of “slandering”. There is A LOT more to it, and if you’re honest, you know it.
I have laughed about other SGM defenders here who don’t have anything better to say, because they they don’t ask the hard questions. ABout you, I don’t laugh. I know you could do better. Sorry bro, but this is embarassing.
May 4th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Jim, sorry if this is out of place, but I think it fits. This is part of Wayne Jacobson’s current issue of “Body Life” Hope it helps and sorry if it is not placed properly.
So how do we know if you’ve been tricked into religion?
When God is a distant concept to you instead of a real presence.
When you find yourself following another man, woman, or a set of principles instead of following Jesus.
When fear of eternity, not measuring up, or falling into error drives your actions.
When you find yourself in empty rituals that do not connect you in a real way to him.
When you are burdened by the expectations of others and feel guilty when you can’t do enough.
When you look at others who struggle with contempt instead of compassion.
When the approval of others means more to you than remaining in the reality of his love.
When you hesitate to be honest about your doubts or struggles because others will judge you.
When you think of holiness as an unachievable duty, rather than aglorious invitation.
When you think righteousness depends on your efforts instead of his grace working in you.
When following him is more about obligation than affection.
When correcting someone’s doctrine is more important than loving them.
When God seems more present on Sunday morning, than he does on Monday.
May 4th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Here is the next paragraph:
If you have only known Christianity to be a set of doctrines, rules and rituals, I have great news. Jesus came and died to open up access between you and his Father. Religion supplants that, distracting us with discipline, commitment and hard work that never yields the fruit it promises. If you’ve been worn out by religion, don’t think you’re alone. Others are just pretending, afraid they are the only ones, too. Life is only found in him.
Does this apply to some of our experiences in SGM? :-)
May 4th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
GDfSGM,
Your comment would be appropriate anywhere.
Excellent!
May 4th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
I aologize in advance for the length of this post.
I happened upon this page through an unfortunate set of circumstances, and let me start by saying that my heart breaks for the accounts shared here, and regardless of the controversy surrounding any of them, my heart breaks for any Christian left hurt or broken from their experiences with their former or current churches.
That being said, I had to respond to a comment made earlier regarding the necessity of airing publically the repeated sin of an elder. I agree, the sin of an elder is not something to be taken lightly, and when repentance doesn’t occur and sin is repeated, there must be a public airing before THE CHURCH BODY. I’ve been in non-SGM churches where the pastors sin had to be aired publically due to non-repentance, it hurt, but was necessary. But what happens when the dirty laundry of the bride of Christ is aired in such a place as this?
Something to think about…. my husband and I joined a Sovereign Grace Church not too long ago, and this church is the first SG church we’ve known. ( I am not hear to dispute the good or the bad of the church or denomination. Nor am I here to accuse of gossip or slander as many others have. This is a seperate issue and I have no desire to start a fight among fellow believers and myself.) I just want to add this thought for people to personally consider.
I was saved nearly 12 years ago and from that day forward I began witnessing to a most beloved, very lost, older sister. I have been faithful to continue witnessing to her for many years, though the Lord still has not opened her eyes to his grace and mercy, and she was a aware we recently moved and joined a new church…. a SGM church. Can you imagine what my UNBELIEVING sister finds when she googles my new church??? This site.
My unbelieving sister and most unbelievers I know have very little knowledge of the differences between a Baptist or Presbyterian, SGMer or E-Free-er. They definitely have no understanding of church government and polity or disagreements about leadership issues. All they see, all SHE sees, is “you Christians” as she so bitterly says (and I am lumped right in here with every sin accused and every wrong deed announced), “nothing more than hyporcrites”.
How do you think my sister will respond to the Gospel message from this sister now… when she reads (and equates it to mean): I am a blind sheep, member of a “kool-aid” drinking church (a specific word picture relating to Jim Jones and the mass suicide of nearly a thousand cult members), with pastors who seek to turn a blind eye to abuses against women and children?
Then my witness to her is destroyed and my heart is broken because of it. I AM CRAZY, I AM A NUT, I AM A DOORMAT TO MY HUSBAND, I JOINED A CULT. That is all she will believe because of what she read, testified to by many witnesses. Just the proof she wanted that this whole Bible and God thing was a farse and a scam.
I am not in anyway implying any poster on this site wants unbelievers or believers to believe any of these things are true of all members of SG churches, but I am simply pointing out what an unbeliever reads, and the conclusions they unfortunately draw about the body of Christ. If statistics from some of these sites are correct, there are over 40,000 members of SG churches across the country and world. Many of you state that we are “good people” who love the Lord but are “blind” to our leaders’ ways. I appreciate your desire to love and look out for the body… but what if my sister isn’t the only sister (mother, father, brother, friend or stranger) being witnessed to by these members who knows how to google a church name??
If this destroys my witness with her, I guess you can say that is my problem for joining a Sovereign Grace Church, but I will say what of those you call “blind” and the families and friends WE love who need the Gospel?? Our witnesses to unbelievers are unavoidable casualties?? Those we reach out to and love who are lost … we know the truth they need…. only they won’t hear it from us, because they think my pastor and my church are part of a huge CULT and that I am clearly a crazy kool-aid drinker?? The reproach brought to the gospel by the actions of some people these accounts discuss is terrible, but many of the refrences here are transferred to uninvolved members of these chruches in the eyes of an unbelieving world (even though I DO NOT believe it is intended for this to happen) and this too brings reproach to the Gospel of our Savior.
The witness of an un-involved party shattered with the lost loved ones we seek to share the gospel with… perhaps an unseen number of casualties in the wake of this “public” discussion? Something which could have been avoided? How many minds of those we love have been made up by this site about what we “condone” and what we “believe” as members of SG churches—even though the accounts here don’t represent the views of many of us who are members—before we have a chance to share with them the Love of Christ? How many of my unsaved friends and family have read the accounts here and want no part of the rich life I have in Christ, which has nothing to do with which church I attend Sunday, because of what they have read here and believe to be a picture of what Christ means to me?
I pray I am the only one who is forced to think these things as a result of this site and the weaknesses and sin in the body of Christ that have been thrust forward on this site for the whole unbelieving world to judge.
I lift up each of you who are hurting and pray our Savior’s healing on you all. I long for the day when we’ll all be together in His Kingdom with no more divisions, no more sin, and no more broken relationships.
Broken hearted…
J.A.
May 4th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Wow, Paul said almost word for word what everyone from SGM says when faced with what we’ve said here. I can’t explain what I feel right now. It’s chilling, actually, that every SGM attendee who comes here uses almost the exact same words. Did you read Canary’s story, Paul? Or Esther’s? Or Noel’s? I’ve heard from five more abused women privately via email. These authoritarian churches can be a breeding ground for abuse. Authority transferred through pastor to Care Group leader to abusive husband to battered wife. Please do the hard work. Research what we’ve said. We’ve said it out of concern for you and for your family.
Cornered people lash out. I know how it feels, though. You don’t want this to be true. You want to say, “But my church isn’t like that!” Then you read all the stories and you realize it IS true and now you have to decide what you’re going to do with this new information. If you’re a sold out SGMer, it stings. You begin making declarations, crying foul. Name-calling ensues. That type thing. Because you’re cornered!
Paul, I want you to know that I love you. It was not my intent to pressure you or corner you in any way. I want God’s best for you and that’s it. I care about that so much that I’m taking precious time away from my kids to tell you so. Please keep reading with an open mind. Maybe you will be the one the apostles listen to!
We are still here in much the same way the whos in who-ville kept saying “We are here! We are here!” We stay, not because we’re addicted to the internet or because we’re filled with bitterness. Paul, I am filled with remorse that I didn’t speak out sooner! My SG experience was more than 13 years ago. Only now are many of my friends coming out into the open air and breathing new freedom in Christ. 13 years is a long time. So is 22. There is a grieving process taking place.
I’m compelled to stay here and continue to speak to these issues because I want all of my friends free to worship with abandon the God who loves them like no other. It hurts us to see people we dearly love in bondage like this. We stay because we love you.
May 4th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
I have friends who are still attending their SG churches. We love them dearly, although we differ radically when it comes to church polity. It’s tough to agree to disagree, but we’ve come to that place with a couple of families and remained close. I think that blesses the heart of God.
I hope you don’t mind, Jim, but I especially want to “out” the Butler family. They have been sweet and gracious and lovely to us. I know we don’t like to use names on here, but since John was a pastor I felt it might be okay to do. We should honor those who continue to be shining examples of godliness within a troubled family of churches!
Transitions are hard (I’m believing a transition away from what caused people harm is taking place within SGM, slowly but surely). They need our prayers and support, even when they mouth off at us. Pray even harder!!
May 4th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
JA-
Thank you for your kind and gracious tone.
First off, I would say that ultimately, if your sister is among the Elect, there will be nothing that could keep her from responding to the Gospel in God’s timing. This is in line with what your denomination believes. Please be at peace concerning your sister’s salvation, as it rests in God’s hands.
If we follow your logic, all your sister needs to reject the Gospel forever is to turn on TBN, or watch Todd Bentley on youtube.
RE this site, I’ll say a few things. First off, if your elders took care of their own dirty laundry, there would be no need for it to be aired here. What you read here are accounts of pastoral malpractice, often covered up by the leaders of your denomination. Elders are no longer rebuked in the presence of all. They are either protected, or their sin is swept under the rug, and they are allowed to step down, as their leaders have discovered that they have a “lack of gifting”.
Paul told Timothy in regards to elders, “as for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear.”
What does the presence of all mean? Everyone in Ephesus? All of the believers in Ephesus? The believers who met in the house where the elder attended? “THE CHURCH BODY”? What is the church body? The people you meet with on Sunday in your building? Where’s that in Scripture?
It’s a sticky question that we really can’t answer from Scripture. I’ll provide a link in my next comment that asks more questions than provides answers.
JA, I long for the day when there are no need for sites such as these. That day will be determined by the leaders of your denomination.
May 4th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
J.A., thank you for your sweet, gracious heart!
We are willing to put our names and lives out here on the internet for all to see, not because we want to cause your sister (or ours) to stumble and to give her proof that Christianity doesn’t work. We’re here to show her that it does. That God heals, delivers, and brings people out of darkness. That His love is everlasting, beyond our wildest imagining. That He did not tell His disciples to go and convict people of sin. That is the Holy Spirit’s job. He told them to go and make disciples. To go and do what they saw Him do — in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and to the ends of the earth. When I first left SGM, I looked all through the Gospels and circled everything Jesus did. Nowhere did He abuse or harm people, even when He was about to die. He never shunned anyone either.
If these blogs were not public, you and your pastor and CJ Mahaney et al would not be able to hear from us. We have all tried to address these things privately but to no avail. If only one of the pastors or apostles or CJ would come on here and tell us change is coming! I would be so very happy! I’d feel so relieved!
May 4th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
J.A.,
Like all of us, what others say or write has NOTHING to do with the salvation of others, especially if we really believe in the doctrines of grace. J.A. during your “membership class” when considering joining a SGM church, you had a “class” on election. Reformed theology (SGM defines itself as essentially reformed) states that ALL those elected WILL come to faith, and that God’s will cannot be thwarted. So, in the reformed camp, your older sister will come to Christ if she is elected.
On the other hand, if you believe that your older sister will only come to Christ if she volitional chooses to, then perhaps your task is to “allow” the resurrected Christ to live out through you AS YOU. He does that if you seek to empty yourself, as He did, as a man. Paul stated that in Philippians; he also said, “I can do NOTHING without the FATHER. You live by the power of HIM living in you, living His life out of you, AS YOU, and your sister and others around you will be ministered to like those in Acts that “turned the world upside down.”
Your SGM “church” won’t substitute for Christ living out through you; nor, will this blog in any way impede the Spirit of the living God reaching the hearts of those He is calling unto Himself.
Most of those posting here have lived through or saw the ugliness of the authoritarian, cult-like tactics of many in SG leadership use.
This blog serves those who have been hurt and those wondering about SGM. What is reported here is healthy and necessary and VALUABLE when consideringSGM or wondering if your experience is an isolated incident. The craziness needs to be exposed for the health of the body.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
JA-I was going to link to a post that I’ve taken down. I’ll paste part of it below. The highlights are from the search feature and mean nothing in this context.
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.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
JA, Welcome!
I understand your thoughts on this, I really do… it’s difficult to have loved ones that are not believers, isn’t it?
I do wonder, though, in light of the accounts of real people who have shared here on this site, how you can state that it would be us that have the capacity to “ruin your witness”? It would be the reputation of SGM that has the possibility of causing your sister to think poorly of Christians if she were to stumble onto The Refuge. Don’t you see that? It is not up to us to keep quiet about the abuses that are inherent in the denomination you are a part of.
Maybe, in order to salvage your testimony, you should think of finding another church, one that has a better Christian “reputation.”
I, too, long for the day when sites like this are no longer needed… I long for the day when fellow brothers and sisters are no longer hurt by SGM.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
J.A. – Your prayers will be heard by our God whose desires us all to glorify Him in all we do, but I suggest you not try to argue with or attempt to sway the opinions of the folks on this blog. I too have unsaved relatives who have been are now having their cynical thoughts about Christians confirmed by the unkind words spoken here and on other similar sites. This blog is a breeding ground for those who love to hear the sound of their own voice. And yes, I am participating in that very act now. But my chief goal was to encourage you to pray more and to not let these blogs be a distraction to you. The Lord is fully aware of all that swirls around us. If your family approaches you with their concerns, be true to the Lord. You can’t do anything about other’s words or actions. But you can glorify Him when you communicate with your family. Make MUCH of Him and he will, indeed, be glorified.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
McD… I will state again… it is not up to us to keep quiet about the abuse that is rampant in SGM. It is the reputation and the inherent problems within SGM and it’s poor way of “doing church” that reflects poorly on you as a member of SGM. But I understand your desire to find someone or some thing (this blog) outside of SGM to blame it on. Makes it a bit more “palatable”…
Just a little something for you to think about…
May 4th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
J.A.
May I ask you to consider something? I was one of the last to become a christian in my home at a time when there was a lot of controversy within the public Christian community. It only caused me to search out truth even more. It was the difference I saw in certain family members that I could not dispute. They were different, they were peaceful and I wanted in. It was their faithful witness that God used to draw me to Himself, regardless of what was in the media.
My experience is true and too painful to go into again, and there has been some resolution, but please know…it happened and I stay here because my heart breaks for those who are still enduring what we went through and are not being heard or cared for and I pray for them. No one who has suffered abuse, in any way, would choose to make this stuff up or look to cause division, we understand the pain and rejection and should never have experienced it from the Body of Christ this way. Jim’s words are so true, if God is calling your sister, her salvation rests in Him alone. Thank you for being considerate to the hurting.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
McD said-But you can glorify Him when you communicate with your family. Make MUCH of Him and he will, indeed, be glorified.
I agree 100%.
Of course I agree with Carole’s statement as well. SGM/PDI covered their tracks for years. I’ll bet they’re really ticked at Al Gore for inventing the internet
May 4th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Jim:
I appreciate your response and the opportunity to post here.
I have no desire to make any accusations or to belittle the situations and experiences of the dear brothers and sisters in Christ who have posted here… please forgive me if anything I say comes across that way. In no way do I wish to add pain or suffering to those who are wounded, only to shed light on an aspect of this discussion that may or may not have been considered by all who post here.
I never stated my sister has rejected the Gospel forever. I know that my God is Sovereign and my sister is in His hands. I have no power to save her or anyone else, only He can do that. But that doesn’t lessen my sadness at the possibilty of losing my opportunities to having meaningful discussions with her about the way that my blessed Savior has worked in my life and in my heart. Phrases used half-heartedly here, such as kool-aid drinkers, have serious meanings behind them that lead believers and unbelievers alike to make conclusions about an entire group of churches and their members. I feel they shouldn’t be used so lightly. Does anyone actually believe on this sight that CJ Mahaney is going to ask all the members to commit suicide, I surely belive not. Then why would such a phrase be used? Such a tragedy is not something that should be turned into a phrase that is so easily thrown around. Can you see the impression it gives the outside world who chooses to look on?
Could not our belief in a Sovereign God be also applied to the desire of those on this blog to “air the laundry” that leadership has failed to deal with properly? God is Sovereign, those he loves and cares for, whom he will glorify some day, that are “trapped” in the snare of this ministry will be taken care of, with or without this blog. Will God not judge harsher those who are the leaders, and if any such leaders are truly wolves in sheeps clothing, I am sure you and I agree, He will deal with them accordingly. Do you see how it can be viewed both ways? I feel, personally, I would err on protecting the reputation of the believers who have not been a part of these things, who faithfully minister the Gospel to those without hope. Again, I don’t believe it’s the intention of any of those who post here to tear down the reputation of the average members of these churches, but you and they must understand that in a fallen world, many are willing to judge us “guilty” by association alone. This goes for members and pastors who are seeking the Lord and are attempting to live a life that is set apart for Him. I believe there are many of “us” out there, pastors and members alike.
I know this sounds antagonistic, and again I apologize for that, I have no desire to further a disagreement among the Body. I do believe your intentions are good, that you mean to bring protection to the Body, but at the same time, I disagree that this is the best means to do so… for the sake of the Body of Chirst as a whole (meaning all Christians, everywhere). Is there any sense that this discussion may, in some ways, tarnish the name of Christ and cast a shadow on honest believers who are truly seeking to do the Lord’s will?
Again… I am not attempting to place the blame on those who are the victims, but at the same time, there may be unforseen consequences in sharing such accounts in a public manner, in a way that may cause unbelievers to be turned away, and for that I believe each person who posts here must be accountable and search their hearts about the words posted here.
Thank you again for the opportunity to post.
J.A.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Carole, I never said I was part of SGM. Your words seem so harsh and are an example of why I suggested JA not try to make her point on this blog. I am so very, very, very thankful that God is on the throne and none of us, not one, can thwart the plans he has for us all.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
McD… Not harsh at all, my friend!
May 4th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
McD,
You go to Chesapeake.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
Oh, McD… tsk-tsk! It’s not nice to try to portray yourself as something you’re not… or trying not to portray yourself as something you are…
May 4th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
To all:
Thanks to all who have responded to in kindness to my post. I do, however, get the feeling that I am being interpreted by some as accusatory.
-Again, and again, let me say, I have no desire to belittle accounts here. I don’t call them stories or tales, but accounts. I never made any accusations that these weren’t true accounts.
-I have no desire to cause pain or hurt, and if by posting I am doing so, perhaps it would be best to move on.
-As I have stated, I don’t “blame” anyone on this sight for being the culprit in this situation. I specifically said I don’t wish to blame any victims or belittle them. They are my brothers and sisters in Christ as much as the members at the church I attend on Sunday, and I will lift them up to our Savior in prayer for healing and reconciliation.
Again, I understand many are hurting here and I don’t wish to cause more burden to you. My only goal was to say that some, when they view this site, don’t translate it as multiple abuses in a “single” group of church, but view it as reflective of Christianity as a whole. It was only to ask you to consider that… not to be argumentative or judgemental or accusatory.
Apologies to any that may feel this way.
~J.A.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
JA… No apologies needed!
Your tender heart was heard loud and clear in your comments… no worries, my sister (or brother!)! 
May 4th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
J.A. -
As a fellow brother in Christ, I share your concern. Unlike many here who post, I am a pastor. I am in the process of church planting in Auburn, WA. My good friends who are in SGM churches recommended me to join SGM through Adoption process. In the beginning I was eager to join. My impression of SGM was: Gospel centered, loving, humble, people-oriented, sound doctrine, godly leadership, and Spirit inviting.
But as I researched into the SGM more as to what they believe and their history and their structure, questions arose in my heart. Although theologically I agree with SGM: Reformed and Charismatic, I could not agree with their church structure. I thought their church structure was a kind of hybrid (mixture of Episcopalian and modified Presbyterian – that is all pastors (or elders) are paid staff). As a pastor, I saw that as a red flag where there is no power among the congregation to decide on some matters. This ultimately leads to abuse by some leaders. [Note: I said, "some" leaders and not "all." I am inclined to believe that there are godly leaders in SGM who love His people with all their heart and who feed them with the knowledge of God].
The sites “SGM Survivors” and “SGM Refuge” clearly opened up my eyes as well. Without these sites, I would not have made a decision against to joining SGM. My friends who are in SGM never spoke of some abuses and problems of SGM… Until, I mentioned about them, then they acknowledged the problem. The impression I got from SGM members is that they try hard to maintain certain “perception” of SGM.
These sites gave me a balanced view of SGM. if I have joined SGM without knowing these things, I would have regretted it personally and I would have grieved my church members unnecessarily.
It is important for me to affirm that I love both ex-SGM members and current SGM members in Christ. The things that are shared and discussed here are important. Sure, at times, our emotions will get the best of us and will write some things we may regret, but that does not change the fact that this site is helpful for believers who seek consolation in Christ.
May 4th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
JA
Your first post sure seemed to indicate you didn’t understand or at least didn’t believe in the “sovereign grace”/Calvinism that SGM says they believe. Calvinism teaches that God irresistably calls those He elects to salvation. It also teaches that those that God doesn’t elect for salvation have no choice of salvation and hence are reprobates. I personally don’t believe in Calvinism but just wanted to point out differences in what you said vs. what SGM supposedly believes.
Thus according to what your church teaches, your sister is either not part of the elect or her time of election hasn’t come. That is what some call the “darker” side of Calvinism. According to this doctrine some have no chance of salvation. If one is to believe in Calvinism one has to accept that God may not elect even some or all of their children to salvation.
One thing that I don’t see with the SGM Leadership is these leaders taking what is being brought up on these blogs seriously. With the growth of these blogs has any of these leaders, especially those at the top, done any soul searching? Are they like the Jews when Jesus said if the miracles that occured before the Jews happened before Gentiles they would have repented? They appear to be easily dismissing what is being said.
If your group is truly non cessationist why are they not inquiring of the Lord regarding what is being alleged on these blogs? Why aren’t you asking this of your leadership such as what are they doing to assess what is being alleged on these blogs?
Fred wrote an interesting comment about the SGM Pastors’ Conference and Mahaney’s reaction to these blogs. It is in the Chesapeake Church thread.
May 4th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
I want to let you all know that I am not a believer in reformed doctrine. (You’ve probably already surmised that from my posts!)
Yes, God can have His way without our help, but maybe He is using this blog as an effective tool to slice right to the marrow of these problems. So many have been helped and supported and healed and restored through these precious imperfect men and women.
May 4th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
JA
Beside what Doulas shared, one other value you should see with these blogs is that they have been a source of healing for people that suffered abuse while within SGM. Knowing that you weren’t the only one that had this experiences and for people to point out the cognitive dissonance that seems to exist in SGM has helped a number of people.
Thus these blogs have served as a source of healing for various members of the body of Christ.
May 4th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
JA–I totally understand your point, I think:
“My family members are not believers. I am. I go to an SGM church. They somehow got on this blog, read some of it, and now think I am in some whacked-out cult filled with hypocrites and worse. This has hurt my testimony of my faith in Christ.”
Is this pretty close? I sincerely apologize if not.
I am very similar to you, in that my parents are not believers. This breaks my heart.
But I must assure you, my dear sister (brother) that they already know that the church (i.e. the Body of Christ, not any particular denomination), is filled with hypocrites. Ask any non-believer, they think we are all hypocrites and morons.
We do not attract people to Christ. Our denominations do not draw people to Christ. Perfection does not lead anyone to Christ.
It is his mercy and grace that does.
If they read here stories told by people in pain, like your family members are, then see the reactions of sympathy, the offers of prayer, the compassion that comes from the other posters here, it may be the first time they see REAL in the body.
The Holy Spirit draws people to Jesus.
However, if your family IS reading, please read this:
We are all messes. We need Jesus Christ desperately. If you do put your faith in Jesus Christ, you will never be perfect, but will be loved, more than ever could have believed or imagined.
JA–I am so very very glad you are here. I will pray, right now, for your family.
May 4th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
Steve240:
Yes, I am reformed, not because of this church I am in now, but I have believed in God’s sovereignty long before I ever heard of the church I am a member of now.
Please re read my first post… never did I indicate that I don’t believe my sister can be saved or that she is somehow lost forever. You must understand however, that it would pain a sister who loves the Lord to no longer be able to have open discussion with her lost sister about her Lord and her Savior. Do you think your family would want to hear the good news of a new cult you joined?? She doesn’t seperate the message of the gospel from this or that group of churches… it’s all just Christianity to her. God can save her, and even through what I have already been faithful to tell her. Though I believe in a Sovereign God, I also believe it is the duty of every believer to be a witness, and in God’s miraculous work of salvation, he finds a use for even me, one who is not very good with words, and can use my testimony to reach an unbelievers heart.
Those of you here who are reformed, I hope do not believe that the Sovereignty of God in salvation somehow relieves you of your duty to be a witness to His wonderful work… I don’t see that reflected in the posting I have read by clearly reformed persons on this site. I am not contradicting myself by saying I have a heart for the lost and am reformed, I believe the two are not mutually exclusive.
Bottom line, I love my sister and this is a hard situation to be in, and that is why I shared my heart on this issue. I didn’t expect to post and have everyone say, “oh you’re right, let us shut down this blog now”…. I respect your opinions and understand why you hold them. I just respectfully disagree.
No intention to antagonize or start further disagreements, especially regarding doctrines of salvation and such :o) .
`JA
May 4th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Thanks RT… the prayers of a fellow believer for unsaved loved ones is always appreciated, no matter where anyone falls on any issue!
My family has always known, like you say, the church is filled with hypocrites. But, this is a bit different, in now they seem to feel I have fallen in with the reincarnation of Jim Jones and that I don’t care about women and children.
Again, the way things are addressed and stated, it doesn’t come across as an issue of some in this church or that, but rather as a problem with every SG-er. It just makes for a difficult situation… for all sides, not just me… understandably for you all as well.
May 4th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
JA.. your last post was in moderation… sorry! Wordpress sometimes has a mind of it’s own and randomly moderates comments… which Jim and I have to manually clear… which normally isn’t a problem, if we are near our computers… :-/
You said, “Those of you here who are reformed, I hope do not believe that the Sovereignty of God in salvation somehow relieves you of your duty to be a witness to His wonderful work… I don’t see that reflected in the posting I have read by clearly reformed persons on this site. I am not contradicting myself by saying I have a heart for the lost and am reformed, I believe the two are not mutually exclusive.”
Jim and I would agree with you… it is our responsibility to share the Gospel!
Here is a quote from Jim when this question came up in an earlier thread here… “What I’m saying is that a Calvinist has faith to share the Gospel because he knows that God will save some. Like when God told Paul to stay in a certain city: ”I have many people here.” We know that He has many people here… Wherever our “here” is.
May 4th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
“Now Back To Our Regular Scheduled Program…?”
HowDee, Ya’All,
Jim,
Hahahahahahahahahahaha!
Thanx for cover’in our “six” here...
Thanx fer cover’in my a double ss. he he
Is Jesus on “point” ?
BLESSINGS!
In a little, ;~)
P.S. FOLKS ! : Please –A little prayer for Bree, would help, Immeasurably!
May 4th, 2009 at 9:48 pm
J.A., I am truly very sorry for the situation that you find yourself in. Prior to posting on this blog, I thought long and hard and prayed about whether or not to post. One of the concerns was exactly what you have written about. After some time, I was convinced that it was absolutely the right thing to do. If you or people you love have experienced abuse, been misled by wrong doctrine and an incomplete Gospel then you can understand why we are all posting.
I am sad to have to bring this up and I mean no disrespect to you or to any others: when Catholic priests were abusing children, would God have said, keep this off the airways because I am sovereign and I will take care of it. Of course not. As has been discussed several times here on Refuge, God has used different forms of media throughout history to bring forth truth and to reveal darkness. He says in His Word, that He will reveal all that is hidden. He uses His people as His hands and feet on this earth, as instruments to bring forth the Gospel (as you desire with your sister) but also to confront evil.
The whole situation is so very sad and I am sad that you and your sister are added to the list of victims. Hopefully, your sister is reading the whole blog. If that is the case, then she has learned much about the love of Jesus, faith, and healing, much about the Spirit of God, and the full Gospel.
Even though it may seem that this blog is the cause of your pain and disappointment in the perceived loss of opportunity, it is not. The leaders of SGM have an opportunity every morning to wake up and decide that this day will be the day to repent and to turn this movement in a new direction – a direction towards Jesus Christ.
To Carole: I thought you were very kind in your earlier response to McD! Not harsh at all!
May 4th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Again Fred, I am not blaming the people on this blog for any situation that has arisen… just asking that people search their heart before posting, which it sounds like you’ve done. Not asking more than that. I don’t consider myself a victim of SG. I do feel that situations in other churches that have not been resolved are sad, and it’s unfortunate that it’s come to this… regardless about what you believe about posting or not posting… it’s sad that it’s come to this and I feel that it has cast a negative light on a lot of uninvolved parties- pastors and every day members–regardless of the intention of individuals posting here.
Being raised Catholic, I don’t feel my view on the lack of a parellel between the Catholic “churh” and the body of Christ would be helpful to this discussion and wish not to offend needlessly.
It is no judgement on whether people were “wrong” or “right” in the original issues, it’s just my opinion that posting them in the “court of public opinion” subjects the church to the judgement of an unbelieving world…. and, again in my opinion, is not the place for Christians to work out their issues with one another. (I know that most of these are not legal issues and I’m not saying there is no place for the law of our land, as in the stories of physical abuse at home, but 1 Cor. 6 comes to mind) I’m not trying to take anything away from anyone who’s been harmed and not saying they don’t need a place for healing. Just expressing a view that I feel that we should protect the Body of Christ’s reputation (NOT TO SAY INDIVIDUALS SHOULD NOT BE EXPOSED TO THE CHURCH WHEN SIN IS PRESENT AND NOT REPENTED OF) but unfortunately, the world doesn’t care to make distinctions between this Christian or that– the whole body is tarnsihed in the eyes of unbelievers when issues aren’t dealt with brother to brother. Again, I understand, as Jim has stated, that many felt they weren’t allowed to do that, but I don’t think we should then go forward and say that we’ll just take it to a forum that puts the weaknesses and broken areas of the Body on display for all the world.
Obviously we disagree on whether this blog is neccessary, I disagree with the public posting here, and that is my personal conviction, but understand your reasoning for doing so. In my experience, unbelievers reading this blog did not come away with a sense of healing and love and openess, etc. — just further disdain for Christianity and the impression that SG churches are super freaky cults whose members lack a basic care and concern for others in the church.
I continue to pray for a resolution of each and every situation discussed here… regardless of what the Lord would have that look like.
May 4th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
JA… so, what you are basically saying here is… cover up the abuses that SGM leaders/pastors have perpetrated against many, many members of their churches… don’t tell the truth, let them continue on their “merry” way, continuing to hurt those they are supposed to be caring for? THAT is not horrible in your eyes, but this blog and speaking openly and honestly, warning fellow believers about this abusive “family of churches” is? All because a non-believer may read this blog and stay an unbeliever because of the truth that is written here?
I guess I’m just not seeing your point…
(You seem to be a very sweet, kind hearted person… I mean no disrespect to you at all in the above startement… but, really… I’m not getting it…)
May 4th, 2009 at 11:14 pm
Carole:
I am sorry if I am not adequately expressing my thoughts here, and I feel from the tone of things, that I have said what can be said, and should most likely retire from my blogging days
)
I am glad to have had the opportunity to post here and to let my convictions be known, even though I am the “odd man out” on this board, many of you have been very gracious though you disagree.
I in NO WAY feel that abuses should be covered and taht abusers should be allowed to go there merry way, I’ve tried to make that glaringly clear in every post, but seem to be failing to communicate my thoughts clearly. I am not a gifted writer and have a hard time translating from head to keyboard. If I have failed to communicate that my heart breaks for people on this site, I am sorry. If I have somehow communicated that things should be overlooked and that I have a lack of conern for victims, again, my apologies— nothing could be further from the truth.
My point was protecting the reputation of the Body as a whole, the church universal, and those who have not contributed to the issues being brought forth here, not sheilding individual offenders. I have no dispute with bringing elders or any other church member to account, my differing view is with the medium that is being used. That is where I would disagree, which I tried to make clear in previous posts. I was only stating that the failure of the accountability process in the church where these things happened is not a reason to take these things out of the context of Christian brothers dealing with one another. I’m not saying walk away and forget it, but I just disagree with this format because of the harm I feel it causes the church… the arguments against this are well documented by many posters above, and I have read each, though still feel strongly that this is not the right format. It is my conviction, and I understand cleraly many here don’t share it.
I apologize to any who have been offended by any postings I have made here. I feel I’ve come to a point of only repeating myself and don’t wish to be a source of frustration to this blog or any believers here. What I have written I can’t find a way to communiate any differently…. and if it’s been misunderstood, apologies to all.
Thank you all for allowing my posts… my prayers will be with each of you. I will be praying God will work mightily to bring healing among His people.
~Signing off, J.A.
May 4th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
JA,
Carole and I launched this site almost one year ago (June 8). You have got to be the most gracious person who has held your opinion that has ever posted here.
Grace and peace,
Jim
May 4th, 2009 at 11:49 pm
JA
I agree with Jim’s assessment of your postings. You should be commended.
Are you aware that at least on one occasion, an SGM Church refused to even take the Peacemaker Route with one member? Here is an organization that endorsed the Peacemaker process but then doesn’t follow it.
C.J. Mahaney in the early 90’s talked about Solomon and his sad ending. One of the errors that Solomon made that Mahaney shared was being at ease with conflict. Solomon practiced that with other kinds. Now you see a number of allegations and reports of abuse done at multiple SGM Churches and what does one see, SGM leadership’s apparent at ease with conflict.
Maybe you should direct some of your questioning there. Maybe you should ask your local pastor and higher leadership what are they doing to address what is being brought out in these blogs?
One other purpose these blogs have done is hold the SGM leadership accountable. With these blogs they no longer have the liberty to do what they use to do without the possibility that their actions will be posted on this and similar blogs. I imagine that things would have been handled differently at the SGM Chesapeake Church had they not known that their actions were going to be reported on these blogs. Who knows, maybe the leadership would have excommunicated the 3 couples without this type of press.
Just some things to think about.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:04 am
J.A.
What of Martin Luther? Should he not have nailed the 95 Theses to the door of the church at Wittenberg? Was there no concern for the reputation of body of Christ when he did that? Yes, there was concern and that is exactly why he nailerd them to the door. SGM has come to the point where there is a separation between the pastors and the congregation and some of the pastors and leaders/apostles have made the concious choice to ignore grievous issues that have occurred and to turn the sin around and point it at the victims. The leaership of SGM needs reform and the only way many believe this can come to pass is by “nailing the issues on the walll” through posting on sites like this blog. Hopefully you will go to your pastor and ask about these things and hopefully they will not be dismissed as “anonymous blog sin”. …I pray that the leadership at SGM will see their corruption and sin and and address it.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:38 am
JA - “there may be unforseen consequences in sharing such accounts in a public manner,”
I have searched my heart, I have conted the bodies, the marriages, the abuses, I have gone to my “Leaders”, and searched my heart.
I would say that there may be unforseen consequences if we do not share such accounts.
Cj is a big boy, and God is bigger that anything CJ has stepped in lately.
I respect John MacAurthur, Martin Luther, and the likes of them.
Where would the church be today if Luther did not post his Theses on the church door?
May 5th, 2009 at 7:51 am
What JA is saying, though, is that we should be posting this information in private forums for Christians rather than in the open for all to see — in an effort to shield those who may be close to coming to Christ from the messy slop that’s out there in these churches.
The thing is, I can’t figure out how to do that and I don’t even know if I agree. Do you post it at Christianity.com? Or write articles for Christianity Today? If there were some way to put a flyer in every bulletin at every Sov. Grace church, I would do that rather than see more broken people. But the pastors wouldn’t, of course, stand for that. I really do get your point, JA. My unsaved family members wouldn’t even bother to google SGM if I were attending one of these churches. (They ridicule me from a distance. LOL!) But I do remember my mother, who is a devout Christian, visiting us and going to church with us and immediately shooting up red flags. She didn’t rest until we left that church in Chesapeake. She hounded me weekly. “Still going to that church? There’s something there that just isn’t right. I want you to pray more about it. Why don’t they let you read books by authors who aren’t sanctioned by their organization? You need to get out of there!” She could not in good conscience let this go. Because she loved us so much.
Would it be better left off the public airwaves so to speak? I’ve struggled with that, too. I’m sure we all have. But the bottom line is, when someone has visited a SGM church and goes home and googles it, I WANT them to find this site so they can make an informed decision about what they’re considering taking their family into.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:43 am
Excommunicated in Chesapeake – No. However, the sr. pastor of the Chesapeake church made it very clear that the 3 couples were most welcome to leave. Gene Emerson also made it very clear at the meeting of Jan 25 that everyone who did not agree with the polity was also free to go.
Also, I absolutely agree with Freedom Fighter! I too want people who are visiting or even thinking of visiting an SGM church to google and find these sites. Then they can decide for themselves with more information than any of us had before we stepped in.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:56 am
J.A., Hope that you are still reading because I would like to say that you did an excellent job explaining your heart/self. You are a better writer than you realize.
Please do not give up hope concerning your witness to your sister. God promises that He will use all things for good for those who love Him and are set apart. He will use this for good in your life and I believe that He will give you opportunities that you would not have had otherwise. It seems that you are a kind and loving sister and that will have a huge impact on your sister. All is not lost…..
As others have said, please follow up with your pastors and the apostles above them. God in His sovereignty brought you here to the blog for a purpose that you may not even realize at this time. We know that nothing is by accident and that there are no coincidences because of the sovereignty of God. He loves you and He loves your sister more than you do.
PS I am not a Calvinist!
May 5th, 2009 at 11:42 am
Fred
My point about the 3 couples at Chesapeake would probably have been treated worse than they were treated if leadership actions weren’t being reported here on this blog. I am sure they were “asked” to leave but at least it wasn’t worse thant that. It is sad that SGM leadership was so resentful of these couples bringing up legitimate points.
May 5th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
You know, I meant to say I’m not a Calvinist, but in my non-caffeinated stupor I said I was not a reformed person instead. I just prefer to go with the letters in red. If Jesus said it, I believe it, and that settles it. (I used to have a bumper sticker on my car that said that back in the early 80s. Talk about turning off nonchristians! Oh, the things we do!)
Back to our friend Paul and his somewhat testy reaction… I’ve been mulling things over in my mind and I’ve come to some conclusions — whether or not they’re God-ordained I don’t yet know. Just ruminating… And this may be a looong rumination. Sorry about that.
When I left the Chesapeake church, my friends who were still there reacted in one of two ways (sometimes both):
1) Since they identified so closely with the church, they seemed to feel I was rejecting them personally, and they were either hurt or angry that I didn’t think they had enough discernment to see what I saw. They may have thought I was being prideful or may have even become worried about me because I was headed in a dangerous direction away from my “covering.” The overarching theme here is hurt. Rejection hurts, and they felt I was rejecting them. The rejection was all the more personal because of the STRONG sense of community within this denomination. It is not like leaving any other church as someone earlier suggested. It’s more like being ripped from your mother’s womb and thrown to wolves. The unbearable ache of losing those tight-knit care group relationships is so much worse than anything we had previously experienced or have experienced since when leaving a church.
If my motives on this blog are coming across as anything other than deep concern for the friends I dearly loved and lost, I apologize from the bottom of my heart. I’m a busy homeschool mother of four who’s scrambling (somewhat unsuccessfully) to find financial resources to pay for two of them to go to college in the fall. I fit these posts into disjointed days of teaching, writing, college applications, and driving kids all over town. Sometimes the message doesn’t come across as I intend it because I’m rushing.
What I’d like everyone to know is how it feels to watch friends and family steadily fall into desperate sin-searching and sorrow. The brightness leaves the eyes. They become hollow and old-looking. Sometimes they beat their children mercilessly because they’ve misunderstood the correct meaning of authority in the family. The Life-giver has been turned away from them. They feel they can never measure up. Every time they find they’ve become victorious in an area, the bar is lifted higher and they realize how far they still have to go. Depression results. Jesus is still on the cross, not beside them helping them get through or advocating for them at the right hand of the Father. If they are not cheerful, they risk being accused of false humility.
I’m watching all this, and I know that it doesn’t have to be that way! I and others like me have found joy and peace and sweetness with our Savior outside the walls of SGM, and we’re watching our loved ones suffer excruciatingly without even knowing it. In fact, they think what they’re doing and how they’re living is right and true. It doesn’t feel good, but that’s okay. Knowing their sins are covered is enough. They don’t dare ask for or expect more.
What do you do with that? You’re discovering that a group of beautiful, sincere, well-meaning, sold out lovers of God is headed in a rickety boat toward a raging waterfall and on top of that, storm clouds are brewing. What do you do?? However imperfectly, you holler, scream, send out life rafts, swim into the waves yourself, whatever it takes. You want to free them from danger.
I sat in the house of one of the three couples and literally burst into tears when I found out what had been happening to Esther — tears of sorrow but also, strangely, relief that truth was finally surfacing. After twelve years of anguished prayer, we are seeing people freed, and this blog is partly responsible for that. We don’t feel as Paul thinks we do about SGM. Our hearts are not bitter. They’re sorrowful and broken. And I’m not here to say “Look at me! I’m so humble and sorrowful!” I CAN’T WAIT TO CELEBRATE VICTORY OVER SATAN’S SCHEMES WITH EVERYONE — INCLUDING CJ MAHANEY, STEVE SHANK, ETC! The day they are released from this error will be a day of rejoicing indeed. I am encouraged at what happened at the pastor’s conference. I don’t believe CJ was angry at being found out. He sits at the helm of a large group of churches and feels responsible for everything that goes on within them. Besides, I’ve had private emails from people who have met with him that indicated he is filled with remorse over the situations involving abuse and molestation. His heart may be broken. God may be reaching out to him. Please, let’s continue to pray for this man!
Okay, I got a little carried away…
The second reaction I faced when I left was the one I didn’t see coming and I can only guess at this one.
2) They were so unnerved that I had fallen away from the narrow road (again, I’m guessing here) that they were anxious to get their families — children especially — as far away from our family as possible. I had backslidden or become a gossip/slanderer in their eyes and they wanted nothing more to do with me. I may have misinterpreted this. It could be that the strong sense of community they had within the church kept them from seeking any outside friendships at all and I was now outside the camp. They were either too busy or too locked into church friendships and otherwise occupied. But oh, how I missed them!
Either one of those reactions/roadblocks can singlehandedly cause the demise of a friendship, and these type things definitely cause division in the church at large (THE church). Only those who sat and listened to me for hours on end work through the emotions and pain of leaving the church and staying true to my deeply held beliefs were able to remain friends with me — and I really tested those friendships. It was a self-indulgent season with lots of tears and long conversation and the overimportance of me, me, me. I have to own that. And many on this blog come across that way, too. As we work through all this together in public, it may well come across as self-indulgent and maybe it is. We can work toward being advocates for change rather than sufferers, but that’s a slow process — even slower for folks like me who suffered from clinical depression and even slower still for those whose stories are much worse than mine. The fact that we’re still here, Paul, even after a year, does not make any kind of statement about our bitter hearts. We needed to have our feeble knees strengthened, not our faces slapped and hearts torn apart. So it takes a good while for us to recover. Maybe longer than a stronger person might need. Love is patient. So is our Lord.
Paul seems to fit into the second category. We make him angry and he thinks we’re all a bunch of sinners who won’t let go of our hurt feelings and walk the high road with God. It’s so tricky to know what to do. I realize that whatever I say here could jeopardize my friendships with the sweet people within SGM who I still consider friends. I don’t want to do that! I can’t sit back and watch people get hooked into an authoritarian church system either. I’m feeling pretty stuck! On top of that, some of these churches are more healthy than others. So people like JA are feeling rather indignant and hurt at what appear to be slanderous accusations and overarching generalizations about him/her and the church he/she attends.
Lord, you hold the answers to all this in Your holy hands. Please rule and reign over our hearts and minds and as Jesus said to His disciples, may we all be one as Jesus and the Father are one! Only You, o God, can accomplish this! Please take up your standard and move mightily on behalf of your precious children. Help us, Lord! Show Yourself strong! And, oh, dear Father, please touch CJ Mahaney and bring wisdom and knowledge to his heart and mind. Help him make the changes needed to build your precious church into a fit habitation in which your Holy Spirit can reside. Amen.
May 5th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
JA, I hope you are still reading the postings— Your uncontentious manner to bring forth your viewpoint is refreshing and truly shows the fruit of the Spirit of kindness! May I bring another experiential viewpoint to the category of unsaved loved ones reading this blog? Our family were the only Christians in our extended family—praying for them for some 30 years. Three years ago my nephew went to live with our daughter in another state. He was previously involved in a well-known gang. He became a Christian and we all witnessed the remarkable change that only Christ brings when we become “born-again”. They were all involved in an SGM church. Shortly after his conversion a member of the church, who was a leader, and a close friend of my nephews, turned away from God and the church and his family. When my nephew learned of more details that contributed to this mans apostasy, and leaderships ‘mishandling’ of it all,there were many questions and wrestlings…and his mother, who also had moved there,shared that she had actually begun to see characteristics of authoritative control in the Sr pastor—and thus, she drew back. We know that family members then shoot up the “see, all Christian are hypocrites—it just isn’t real” card. However, this blog has actually been a huge help!!!! because we all are able to see that Christians are taking a stand for Truth—speaking Truth,declaring that what has gone on in some SGM churches is UNChristlike and that it is being exposed and brought out into the light.–So–in our circumstance, it has been a great help of communication—for new Believers to see that we Christians are not willing to cover up obvious sinful behaviors etc—and that we are willing ( and yet saddened to have to do so) to use the media outlet God has provided to expose corruption that is blaringly obvious—even to new Christians!!
May 5th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Thanks for sharing Waters. Excellent testimony!
May 5th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Still in SGM, pfr:
I do desire not to be repetitive and frustrating to anyone on the site, but since the issue addressed in this post is not one I previously responded to, I hope this post is acceptable.
I have seen many references to Luther on this site, and please allow me to respectfully disagree to the seeming excact parellel that is being drawn between that situation and this one for the following reasons:
1. Luther posted his theses on the door, as was common practice in that day, but they were posted in Latin, a language he was very aware was spoken and read by very few, mainly clergy… he had made the argument that having a Bible in Latin meant the majority of the people couldn’t read it and could only rely on clergy to tell them what it said… so he new that nearly the only people able to read the theses would be the clergy. If he had meant it as a warning to the people rather than a address to the clergy, perhaps it would have been in German, the language of the people. I don’t think it is a fair characterization that Luther’s intent was to warn the people, it seems more accurately he was seeking to address needed change to the clergy.
2. Everyone was Catholic then… there wasn’t a choice. Germany didn’t really even exist, they were a part of the “Holy Roman Empire” and everyone, every single person residing within it’s borders, was subject to the rule of the church, who had the power to imprison, put to death, etc. So there were no people on the outside of the church looking in … no secular world and Catholic world… everyone was in whether they liked it or not. No one was going to say , “hmmm… the Catholic church, don’t know much about them, but I am going to be on guard”… these were the people making decisions over their everyday lives, they paid their taxes to the church. For the most part, the Catholic church functioned as a “religious institution” and government that basically conquered territories and peoples, not as a community of believers who have a deep and meaningful relationship with Christ.
Forgive me if I have in any way misrepresented those facts, but I do not feel the two situations are such close parellels that we can say… if it was right for Luther, then it is right for us. He was dealing with a church that had taken control of the government and the people, they were given no options to worship in ways other than prescribed by the Catholic clergy. He was addressing a sin that would have been open, in the streets, on a “nation-wide” level, where any German would have been familiar to the horrible practices being forced on all the people of the “Holy Roman Empire”.
In contrast, this board is addressing a specific group of churches inside the body of Christ and specific instances within those churches between individuals and their leaders or one another, so in my opinion (one I know that is not shared among most, if any, here) I, personally, feel that this would not be the right format in which to bring grievances against a church or it’s leaders, to be informing people of accusations made agianst people that many who read here have never met and will never meet. Especially when it has the potential to give people a certian, negative idea about an entire group, an idea that is not representative of all the people and leaders in that group.
I do see the parellels, a man of God who sees injustice in the church desires to confront that church… and I understand many here feel they are vicitims of that injustice and that others may become victims of it as well… I am simply commenting on what I see as a less than accurate parellel that is being drawn between the situation of Luther’s 95 Theses and this type of public “outing”, if you will, of the sin of specific, named individuals within the church, the family of God.
If anyone reading this post hasn’t read my previous posts, please hear that I am in no way saying injustices in the church should be swept under the rug to save face for leaders, members, or anyone else. NOTHING COULD BE FARTHER FROM WHAT I BELIEVE. Please refer to my previous posts if there is question regarding my view on any of that.
I hope it was acceptable to post again in response to the comments and questions directed at my earlier posts. I also pray that people don’t see me as one who is lessening the severity of the situations that many have encountered.
~JA
May 5th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Apologies to all for an obvious lack in my ability to be short and to the point….
)
May 5th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Hi ~JA! (I like the curlicue in front of your name… thought I’d add it, too)
I’m wondering… since you don’t feel that this blog is the proper way to address these issues, what would you suggest? (I’m really not being facetious… I’m truly curious)
May 5th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
J. A.
I believe within about 2 weeks the theses had been translated into German and distributed throughout Germany and shortly thereafter throughout Europe.
SGM leadership has turned a deaf ear – the pastors/leaders/apostles have chosen not to respond and have told the church leadership not to respond.
I don’t see how having this conversation on a private forum would bring about change because no one would be aware of it. In addition, no one considering an SGM church would have the benefit of being aware that these issues exist.
What, in your mind would be a valid way to handle it?
May 5th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Still in… Great minds think alike…
May 5th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
We all can quote Jer 29:11almost verbatim, I’d guess. I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not calamity to give you a future and a hope.
Have you ever read just a wee more? Jer 29:13 You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart.
J.A., when a heart truly searches for God wholeheartedly, nothing will prevent that heart from finding God. Nothing. Not fear. Not doubt. Not intimidation. Not a website. Not ridicule. Not my sin. (Nor your sin.)
A heart seeking for the Truth will be found. God says in the next verse, as if verse 13 wasn’t enough… Jer 29:14…. I will be found by you.
Fear not, J.A. If your sister’s heart seeks, she will find.
May 5th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Wow, I was literally just thinking the same thing! What else can we do? Maybe I should be writing directly to CJ? I would love to be part of the solution and to see everyone united and walking in freedom. My husband is a tv producer. I’m sure he’d be happy to make a video presentation with testimonies. That would show our faces and better exemplify our hearts on all this… But I don’t know if it would be appropriate or not…
May 5th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Thanks for that reminder, Remnant!
May 5th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Carole:
How did I know that would be the next question I got??
) I truly wish the answer to that question was easy. If only I could say, all you have to do is _______ and this will be worked out.
I am sure that sentiment is shared by many here. I would have the suspicion that many who post here feel they have exhausted every other means, and therefore feel SG is “forcing their hand” in a way. I don’t think that there is joy taken in “outing” the churches you once loved and I am not suggesting people have just taken the act of posting here lightly.
That being said, perhaps the new church homes many have found would be a way to fill the needs that are being met here. 1. By being a place to find friends and family who allow you to speak out and share. 2. By addressing the leadership in your new church and asking for their help to further address the leadership in your former SG church or directly to the SG leadership in Maryland.
My heart in this is just to say that the people of God should be the “judges” of the people of God. I feel this forum has opened up issues of the family of God to those outside the family of God, and I, personally, feel that is not the right course. Though I am not encouraging it, I’d rather see a group of witnesses ( who have gone through every attemp to work with leadership and exhausted every other way to deal with the situation) walk into a church gathering in their former church on a Sunday morning with a megaphone and shout the issues to the congregation with force ( non violent type of course
) ) than I would see them posted here. I’m sure if a pastor reads that they’d cringe, but IF EVERY OTHER MEANS OF WORKING THROUGH AN ISSUE has been exhausted, I still feel it’s better to let the church of God work out their issues together than to throw them here before the world.
I know that isn’t a solution, it’s just an example of how radically I hope I would react in order to keep the issues of the church among the church. That has always been my heart in this type of situation, I don’t feel it’s “learned” from Sovereign Grace, but unfortunately I’ve walked through some serious issues in other churches not related to them and have always felt that the church (the church universal) should deal ( and I understand this has not happened in most situations here) with their issues themselves.
I don’t know if this is in any way helpful… again I am acknowledging the situation has become sticky, to say the least, among many who have posted here and understand there is no clear way for some to move forward. My thought and heart on the issue is just that the desired ends (reconciliation, discipline, accountability, protection, etc.) don’t justify the means, if indeed the means are outside of God’s desire for his people, which would be my PERSONAL feeling on this type of blog.
No offense intended to any who post here… it is difficult for me to express my views, which I know fly in the face of most here… and still express my love and concern for those affected by this issue. I hope the expression of one doesn’t eclipse the reality of the other….
Respectfully,
~JA
May 5th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
JA-
what would you do if you were in our shoes? How would you handle it differently if you were Jim, or Noel, or me ?
http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=73
peace-mm
May 5th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
JA
I know you are posting comments to people that are posting here which might explain this but is sure sounds like your comments are all one sided. You keep commenting on the people posting on these blogs but really have said nothing about what SGM Leadership should be doing or isn’t doing but should be doing. This kind of leads me wondering what you think SGM Leadership should be doing that they aren’t to bring peace and reconciliation here.
You have nicely criticized and questioned our posting our concerns here. What do you think SGM Leadership should be doing? Is this acceptable that they are stone walling here?
May 6th, 2009 at 12:19 am
JA–I’m so glad you keep coming back…it is refreshing to dialogue with someone as gracious as you are. I prayed for your family today, I would covet your prayers for my unsaved parents, also.
Your biggest problem is not that your unsaved loved ones will read this blog and never come to Christ. God is waayyyy too big for that.
Your main problem is that you are joined to a particular denomination that has many many incidents of abuse, poor leadership, lack of scholarship, and odd clone-like attributes: no international missions (ignoring the Great Commission), little ministry to the poor, no benevolence, a ‘missions fund’ that is simply a mortgage payoff, homeschooling, courting, SGMspeak, approved booklists, disallowed books, etc.
Your family will notice this, if they haven’t already.
Often, we get involved in a congregation that deals in weirdness. This, however, is a denomination marked with it because of their Catholic-style POLITY.
Perhaps you should find a denomination with better, more sound polity, or find a church that is quite solid with lay leadership (elected elders), educated pastors, diversity in thought on the non-essentials, vibant missions outreach, pity for the poor in the community, freedom.
I am so glad you are here.
May 6th, 2009 at 1:09 am
JA,
May 4 at 6:07pm (I think that’s the time), you said
“I AM CRAZY, I AM A NUT, I AM A DOORMAT TO MY HUSBAND, I JOINED A CULT. That is all she will believe because of what she read, testified to by many witnesses.”
JA, first, let me say “welcome” and I’m late in my welcome. Apologies. Life got in the way of blog-reading. :) I do want to comment on what you said. I’m so sorry about your sister and the current perceived “roadblock” with her having read blogs. I didn’t even finish reading all the comments. I skimmed most of them. So, I’m not sure what others have said. I don’t want to share advice. I just want to share my own personal experience…
For 13 years, while my parents were at CLC and I was not a saved person, I called it a cult. I hated the people, I hated the place, I hated their “faith” I hated the way they lived. (I did get saved, spent 12 years in a few different SGM churches, was full-on committed until the scales fell last summer.)
I have a dearest friend who was devout (mass every day devout) Catholic for her entire life. She got saved and came to CLC. She spent less than 6 months there till she made the unequivocal proclamation that CLC is a cult. In the 12 years that have ensued, she has not backed down on that assesment.
I have other family members who were not saved till just recently and called CLC a cult for the last 27 years. They do not go to SGM churches, but were well aware of CLC and their perception of it for a long time.
I have other family members who have thought CLC is a cult for 27 years, continue to think that way and make no bones about it. Some of them are saved now, but most of them are not.
Sooooo….I say…..God can save someone who knows for a fact (in their mind) that this is a cult and bring them there and have them full-on committed to the denomination for 12 years (that’s me). Of course, for the time I was there, I would have fought to the death that it was not a cult. God can save someone who today believes it’s a cult and they go and thrive in other christian churches for their whole life. God can have people view it as a cult and not get saved….yet… AND lastly, though CLC family members make fun of their “nominal christian” position, the family members who got saved and do not go to SGM churches are still very very deeply close family members.
I hope you can feel comforted that even if your sister reads things in public, God has planned that too. She might be scared for you. She might read things and be genuinely concerned for you. I don’t know. But, I do know that this forum has been helping me “detox” and “find normal” after more than a decade of “unhealthy.” God is good. This public forum is also good.
Sidney
May 6th, 2009 at 7:08 am
Sidney,
I’m so glad these blogs have helped you!
Thanks for responding to my question over at SGM Survivors regarding expository preaching. I went to hear CJ Mahaney in person back in January, and it DEFINITELY WAS NOT expository preaching. CJ’s message was entitled “Cravings and Conflicts” and I discovered after the fact that he has spoken on that topic before. His sermon by that title can be accessed via the internet. I have sat under expository preaching for the last seven years, so I know it when I hear it!
I’ll be praying for you!
Blessings,
Wanda
May 6th, 2009 at 7:35 am
When I was at CLC in the early 90’s the preaching that Mahaney did was rarely teaching from the scriptures or expository. What he would typically do is start with reading one passage of scripture and then spend the rest of the time (usually a good hour) exhorting.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:58 am
Many SGM pastors preach topically. Even pastors who list their churches on the 9Marks site.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:21 am
And even if they call it expository and they preach “through” a book of the Bible, it’s still not really expository. It’s topical based on a section of scripture. Or am I missing the point?
May 6th, 2009 at 8:26 am
I said: For 13 years, while my parents were at CLC and I was not a saved person, I called it a cult. I hated the people, I hated the place, I hated their “faith” I hated the way they lived. (I did get saved, spent 12 years in a few different SGM churches, was full-on committed until the scales fell last summer.)
I just re-read that part of my comment last night and I have to correct something. When I was in my mid-20s and I had a big change in how I was living my life, I then decided the only right thing to do was to go to my parents’ church, CLC. So, I did. In my pastoral interview, theh pastor decided (for me) that, since I had sinned habitually in the meantime, the salvation I experienced when I was 10 or 11 didn’t “stick” and I would now be calling myself “saved” as of the time I started going to CLC.
So, for those 13 years I called CLC a cult (as I said in my comment from last night), I was a believer. I said I was not, but now that I am making decisions for my own life by myself (with hubby, of course, but you know what I mean), I have decided that I was saved. The pastor should not have been the one deciding for me when I had a personal relationship with Jesus. I had a deep understanding of the Gospel and I had conviction of sin. Yes, I continued to sin. In big and bad ways. I never went without guilt. Part of my sin was rebellion against my parents’ church. If I had acted as a saved person, I’d have had to go to CLC and, at the time, it made my stomach turn.
Ok, I just had to clarify. Sorry for belaboring it. This is all part of my “detox” process.
Sidney
May 6th, 2009 at 8:31 am
Sidney,
I think you got the point, re your 8:21.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Yes, that is one of my big problems with SGM, they only preach topically. even when they are going through a book of the bible it is really preaching topically. While I was at CLC they preached through the book of Galatians in 4 weeks – it really was a topical preaching on the church. They also did the book of acts in I think 12 weeks – it really was a topical preaching as well – they even did one message on something like 6 chapters.
While I think they do choose to be topical, I also think in some ways they have to be topical for two reasons.
One, most of their pastors do not have the education and training to study the scripture and really preach expositorilly like you would expect at a reformed church. Most have not been to seminary, many have not been to college and not all have even been to their pastors college. They don’t know Greek and Hebrew, and really are unqualified to examine and expository preach on scripture.
Second, they rotate who is preaching so often that there it would be impractical to preach expository. Normally, when pastors preach through a book of the Bible they spend weeks/months studying that book as a whole in order to preach it. There is no way to do a sound expository sermon in a book series from just a passage without studying the books as a whole, most seminaries teach this. At CLC we would sometimes have 7 different speakers in a 10 week period. Not everyone one of these men is going to spend the time to really examine the scripture as a whole and preach expositorially, it is just impractical.
I always wonder how they do consider themselves 9 marks churches when clearly they do not preach the way 9 marks says to.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:48 am
Presbyterian,
The 9th Mark is also a complete deal-killer. Click on the 9th Mark to see what they mean by “Biblical understanding of leadership”. Here’s a small portion-“The congregation has real authority. It is also true that the Bible presents the local congregation as having the final say in matters of dispute, doctrine, discipline, and membership. The congregation exercises this authority for the maintenance of the Body’s health and for the accountability of the elders.”
There are a lot of things we can’t broad brush, but this issue is not one. SGM as a whole obviously rejects this concept.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:49 am
~JA… I do understand your concerns and appreciate your thoughts. I wish the answer to dealing with SGM’s very unorthodox practices were as easy as the suggestions you gave here. (Except walking in to a church on a Sunday morning with a megaphone is cause for arrest for trespassing in these here parts!)
Not to diminish your obvious care and concern, but, unfortunately, the avenues you have suggested are not only unworkable (I don’t think I would like jail) but a dead end. Why? you ask… 
SGM and it’s family of churches have insulated themselves from other churches in their communities. They don’t have relationships with other pastors/leaders in other churches, they don’t have a level of “respect” (for lack of a better term) for anyone outside of SGM, except those that CJ et el deem to be worthy of respect… most of those being on a “national” level rather than a local level. Therefore, without mutual respect, those leaders in other churches would not be heard, just as the members of those SGM churches haven’t been given their ear.
When our family left our SGM church, my husband asked our then-pastor if he could recommend a good church in the area… he was told (by our ex-pastor) that we should move to _________ (a different STATE!) to attend an SGM church there. (The pastor who had moved there for a church adoption had pastored our church while our ex-pastor was at the pc). We don’t live in Tim-Buc-Tu! There are many churches in the area. But he could not recommend even one!
That says a lot about the level of respect they have for non SGM ministries/denominations. It also says a lot about how they would respond to non-SGM pastors/leaders bringing observations to them regarding issues with ex-members who are now attending their churches.
Believe me when I say that Jim and I weighed the cost before we ever started this blog. It would not have been our first choice…. or even our second or tenth choice. For anyone who thinks this has been easy, let me just say that it has not. But after exhausting all other options (for three years), this was the only one that was left open to us. Not an easy decision, but a necessary one in my opinion. If you haven’t already, I would suggest you read Jim’s comment above on “Telling It To The Church”… it may answer some of your questions as to why The Refuge exists.
As far as unbelievers reading here (your statement of the church being the judge, not the world)… while I agree with you in theory, I don’t think there are very many unbelievers spending their time reading here in order to have a reason to stay in their unbelieving state. Before God saved me, I would latch onto any reason I could, even outrageous ones, to “keep those Christians from preaching at me.” Until God opens our eyes to Him and His saving grace, we cannot understand Him, His word, His ways. And we are repulsed by the things of God, we are enemies of Him. We will latch onto anything to make ourselves seem “right”.
I’m truly sorry of your family members have latched onto The Refuge and the accounts herein as an excuse and as a concern for you. (I think they have a valid concern regarding your connection with SGM.) To accuse you of being affiliated with a “Jim Jones type cult” did not come from The Refuge, though. We have never accused SGM of that or anything close to that. If your family members are taking anything said here and taking it to that extreme, outside the realm of what has been written here, well… we can’t and won’t take the blame for that.
I hope you continue to read and comment here… it’s through mutual, respectful dialogue that hope remains. While we may disagree (agreeably!) it’s good to hear ideas from a different perspective than mine. Who knows? Maybe, just maybe, we will find a way, together, both sides of this controversy, to find our way to reconciliation. God is a very BIG God and I have faith and hope in Him to bring resolution to His bride, the whole body of Christ.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:50 am
Pastors who teach topically have an agenda to sell, and they can do that by picking and choosing what they will preach.
If they preach through Scripture, of course topics will come up. But they will be forced at that point to preach the whole counsel of God.
So, when confronted with a verse about submitting one to another, or a verse about Jesus came for our freedom, or Proverbs 31, with that fantastically free, submitting, hard-working, elegant, smart woman, or a troubling passage, perhaps something from James, they would have to study hard, consult the original language, call a seminary prof…they might not be comfortable with that.
But…CONTROL is the issue.
Topical preaching, every once in awhile, whatever.
But CONTROL is the issue: I get to ’speak the Word’ to my people, and EDIT it, too. I become the Word-author, but deleting things I don’t want to study or don’t want my people to hear.
Reader’s Digest preaching.
Run.
May 6th, 2009 at 9:19 am
JA
Thanks for the gracious response.
Being that I never had a clear response from CJ, Josh, or any other Pastors in regard to this, perhaps you could shed some light on the subject if you would be so kind. –
Here are two of many CJ quotes -
So what was Phelps searching for in that bong pipe? What emptiness in his soul was he trying to satisfy? – CJ Mahaney
“Would he be humble and gracious in defeat? Sadly, he didn’t appear to be. Before the game officially ended he had already left the field. Sure, he did make his way across the field to congratulate Tom Coughlin, but then he left the field and the game was not over! He should have returned to the field to take his place as coach for the final play of the game. He should have humbly returned to the sideline and set an example as the leader of this team.” – CJ Mahaney
Without even having met these people, CJ has no issue going public with his thoughts and opinions of them? How is this not Gossip or slander? The words are not directed to the individual first. They do not seem to be uplifting or encouraging, nor does it seem that CJ is part of the problem or solution when it comes to these two.
I can not imagine that CJ has even had an opportunity to hear the “other side” of the story.
Then when his opinion is requested both privately and publicly by a man whom he claims to have the, “Deepest respect” for, he remains silent.
“When 1 Timothy 5:20 says, “Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all,” it is talking about elders in particular. Those in public ministry must be rebuked publicly when their sin is repeated, and public, and confirmed by multiple witnesses.”
“It is past time for the issue to be dealt with publicly.”
“Finally, it seriously overstates the involvement of John Piper and C. J. Mahaney to say they are “discipling” Mark Driscoll. In the first place, the idea that a grown man already in public ministry and constantly in the national spotlight needs space to be “mentored” before it’s fair to subject his public actions to biblical scrutiny seems to put the whole process backward. These problems have been talked about in both public and private contexts for at least three or four years. At some point the plea that this is a maturity issue and Mark Driscoll just needs time to mature wears thin. In the meantime, the media is having a field day writing stories that suggest trashy talk is one of the hallmarks of the “New Calvinism;” and countless students whom I love and am personally acquainted with are being led into similar carnal behavior by imitating Mark Driscoll’s speech and lifestyle. Enough is enough.”
“Yes, I did inform John Piper and C. J. Mahaney of my concerns about this material several weeks ago. I itemized all of these issues in much more thorough detail than I have written about them here, and I expressly told them I was preparing this series of articles for the blog.”
“To those asking why pastors Piper and Mahaney (and others in positions of key leadership) haven’t publicly expressed similar concerns of their own, that is not a question for me. I hope you will write and ask them.”
– John MacAurthur
So this Pastor and Theologian, who from where I sit, actually raised the visibility of CJ and SGM by inviting him to preach at his church a few short years ago, has a concern, and has posted it on his blog.
Is John wrong for doing this?
Is CJ right it being silent?
How is humility truly displayed in this for CJ.
This refuge testifies to both patterns and events that have been confirmed by multiple witnesses.
I would say the same to SGM
It is past time for the issue to be dealt with publicly.
May 6th, 2009 at 9:27 am
PFR,
I wish I had a “clapping hands icon”, as I would surely insert it here in response to your above comment!
I know this isn’t the same, but for what it’s worth…
:CLAPPING HANDS:
May 6th, 2009 at 9:28 am
okay… that didn’t translate as well as the visual… but you get the gist… right??
May 6th, 2009 at 10:08 am
okay… that didn’t translate as well as the visual… but you get the gist… right??
Yep, Carole! Comes through loud and clear!
and PFR, I agree with Carole – excellent, excellent post!!!
May 6th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Here’s a comment I posted over at SGM Survivors yesterday, which I will post here as well. Thanks for the comments on expository preaching. I think this is an important topic because of the direction C.J. Mahaney now appears to be taking with regard to preaching. After all, “Change is here to stay!”
Does CJ Mahaney preach in an expositional manner? I prefer to call it “expository preaching”.
For those of you who may not be familiar with expository preaching, here’s the definition according to Theopedia:
“Expository preaching is a kind of preaching that expounds upon the meaning of a particular text or passage of Scripture. One defining characteristic of expository preaching is that it does not dwell on non-biblical examples. It does not focus on stories, jokes and anecdotes. Instead, it seeks to stay focused on the text in question.”
I have sat under much expository preaching, so I am very familiar with it. Pastors who do expository preaching take a book of the Bible and preach through it line by line, explaining the meaning of each verse. Their long-term goal is to preach through the entire Bible in this manner. John MacArthur is a proponent of this type of preaching.
The reason I ask is CJ Mahaney is one of speakers who will address pastors and church leaders at an upcoming conference to be held at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (SEBTS). Here’s the information provided on the SEBTS website:
God Exposed: Awkward Preaching in a Comfortable Age
September 25-26, 2009
Sponsored by 9Marks and Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
“God Exposed will call pastors and church leaders to embrace and defend expositional preaching as a means to strengthen and grow the church. Expositional preaching – that which has as its aim to explain and apply a particular portion of God’s Word – is especially important in a day when many are abandoning faithfulness to the Scripture in their pulpit ministries. This conference will encourage and train pastors whose primary calling is ministering the Word of God to their people.”
May 6th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Concerning Expository and Topical preaching:
Being a pastor, I think I could give you a pastoral perspective.
NOTE: I prefer Expository preaching personally. I am currently preaching through Philemon (7 week series).
In my seminary training, my homiletical professor said something like this. “You could be a bad expositor preacher, if you approach the text topically. Or you could be a good topical preacher, if you approach the text expositionally.”
He meant: just simply going through the book of the Bible in series do not make you an expository preacher. My professor emphasized the fact that Paul’s letters were topical — that is, he did not write a letter expounding on the OT books. Rather, topics were raised by the church whom he was writing to. Therefore, the topical preaching isn’t necessarily an inferior preaching style than expository preaching. The issue is rather, in the given topic of the passage, is the preacher preaching expositionally.
In a practical sense, I do see the necessity to preach topically, such as: abortion, homosexuality, greed, domestic abuse, etc… BUT when I choose the text for the topic listed, I must also exercise all the expository elements so that I may not disregard the context of the passage.
In conclusion, it all depends on the preacher.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Thanks for your thoughful reply about expository preaching, Doulos. That makes a lot of sense!
The information you provided on Christian legalism is excellent! It was such an important topic when the books of the Bible that address it were written, and legalism continues to be a serious problem within Christendom.
May 6th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
When I was at CLC through the early 90’s C.J. Mahaney’s typically would teach by reading a passage from the bible and then spending the remaining time “exhorting” and rarely go back and teach more from the scriptures. There were exceptions but that is what I typically saw.
As I have said before, Mahaney was always a reader of books and not a studier of the book (the bible). I am sure at least some of that is due to the reasons Presberterian indicated.
May 6th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Steve240,
I have only heard CJ Mahaney preach once, and that was in January 2009. What you have described is EXACTLY what CJ did. He read a passage of Scripture (which was also up on the large screens in the church), but he didn’t refer back to those specific verses again during his message.
I just don’t understand what qualifies CJ to instruct other pastors and church leaders in how to do expository preaching. I’m very confused…
May 6th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
J.A.
I am sure the comments directed to you are piling up.
Here are a few more things I would add.
One excuse I always hear from SGM members that is used to explain away actions of SGM leaders is that these leaders are “imperfect.” If these leaders are so imperfect, why are they never willing to admit their imperfections?
The only response that I have seen from these blogs from SGM leadership was Noel’s story. This was where a 3 year old girl was molested by a 15 year old boy who was also a member of the Fairfax SGM church. The couple shared how poorly they were treated and how leadership tried to minmize what the boy had done. The Fairfax Church’s leaders response was to “pollute the well” and tell their members that their were some mistruths in what Noel reported. When the couple met with the Fairfax Church leaders and asked the leaders to point out what the couple wrongly reported the Fairfax Leaders evaded and didn’t point out specifics. Based on this it sure sounds like the leaders tried to discredit what happened vs. accept responsibility. That whole case is quite a sad story.
My take on when someone talks about a “kool-aid” drinker is that they are someone that accepts whatever teaching that comes down without much if any thinking. Kris from the SGM blog has said that SGM seems to attract people that come from a Catholic type background where they are use to direction coming from above and willing to accept “our leaders have spoken” without any questioning. “Kool-aid” drinking also can be used when people “parrot” what teaching they receive without thinking.
Another purpose I see is that these blogs help protect the body of Christ. Most people have shared that there are few conversions taking place in SGM. Most who join SGM became believers somewhere else. It is good for believers to have this resource out there so they can go in with their eyes open knowing that possible abuses occur within Sovereign Grace Minitries. The can then make a more informed decision.
Hope this helps.
May 6th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Steve,
Don’t forget that Noel’s story was repeated and habitual. At least 7 times the boy molested that toddler. And there had been cases of child molestation before that and after that. I think the fact that it became so public and it was verging on breaking laws, they had no choice but to address it.
Sidney
May 6th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
carole
Thanks, I get it.
May 6th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
Sidney
Thanks for filling in the details. It was quite a sad case.
Here is one summary that may be of interest:
From reading Noel’s story some of the big concerns with this incident (according to her story) include:
SGM pastors not immediately reporting this incident to local authorities. It was the girl’s family doctor who pushed to have this done.
The boy’s lack of truthfulness with his confession. There was also an initial clam that it was a one time incident where it came out that this molestation was done a number of times. Additionally there was an initial claim that the girl wasn’t awake when she was molested when that proved to not be the case.
The boy’s lack of being sorry for what he did to the little girl. Noel indicates his actions were (when finally having to make a confession in care group):
Boy said, “I guess that will shut them up for a while.” He was twofaced, accusing and rude to us and meek and submissive to the team.
The boy’s mother apparent hiding of the full details of what this 15 year old boy actually did to minimize what her boy did. This mother also refused access to the police records on this case.
The Fairfax pastors seeming denial that the boy was not telling the whole story.This includes ignoring an appeal from the girl’s parents to hear this other side under the guise of doing so would be “gossip.”
The mother’s bad attitude and denial of just how heinous what her son did and wanting to hide these charges so her son wouldn’t be disqualified from either serving in the military or teaching.
There was a motion for the reversal of charges against the boy that the pastors supported without sharing this with the girl’s family. The Fairfax pastors were upset that Noel and her husband filed a letter to the court asking that this motion not be granted due to the boy’s apparent untruthfulness and lack of sorrow for what he did.
The boy 2 years after molesting this young girl was then allowed to serve in children’s ministry at the Fairfax Church.
They now understand that the boy who did this act is now married with one child. People are questioning whether the woman who married this boy was alerted to this boy’s past before getting married.
Another significant issue that Noel has brought up is about how they were made to feel guilty and bad about their “unforgiveness” towards the boy that molested their daughter.
Reading Noel’s story certainly sounds like a situation that was poorly handled by the leadership at the Fairfax Church and SGM.
May 6th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Unfortunately the formatting didn’t cut and paste as well as it appeared when I tried it. The above comments are a summary of what I found going over the blog comments Noel posted on SGM Survivors.
May 7th, 2009 at 2:37 am
*
*
Jim,
*
Blessings!
*
Yous gots : έντερα & chutzpah bro!
*
Blessings! (ands ma prayers!)
*
*
In a little, :~)
*
Sopy
P.S. God bless you very, very much Mrs. P.
May 7th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Re: Steve – that is how just about all the SGM pastors preach. The other thing that bothered me wiht it, that is tied to that, is that they never refrenced any other scriptures. Scripture interprets scripture is one of the foudnations of Bible study, but instead it seemed that quotes from spurgeon and others interpreted scripture. THere would be great leaps in what the passage said to what they thought it meant, and there never was scripture backing up these leaps – even when the leaps they made were correct and i knew scripture that backed it up they did not use it, and at most use a quote from someone to support it if they supported it at all.
Of course all of this ties with thier lack of bible teaching to the congregation, the beleif that we don’t need to be like the Bereans and test the teaching to scripture, and tack of congregational involvement in and often knowledge of decisions about doctrine/practice, adn the need for the flock to just about unconditionally obey the leaders. There is no need to support where you got what you are preaching becuase the flock is supposed to obey what you say, and they aren’t suppose to question it so why would they show it. Drives me crazy.
May 7th, 2009 at 9:37 am
Preacing styles aside -
“Never lay it aside. Never move on,” C.J. Mahaney on the cross.
“Without Christ’s resurrection, and the salvation and blessings it brings, Christianity would be pointless and pitiable,” John MacAurtur on the ressurection.
May 7th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Presbyterian – you said (May 6th, 2009 at 8:33 am )
‘I always wonder how they do consider themselves 9 marks churches when clearly they do not preach the way 9 marks says to.”
I am stumped by these supposed signs of affirmation that SGM is a valid partner who is truly “together for the Gospel”. Who listens to these tapes? And what tapes are sent? If there is any real transparency among these “big dogs” I would assume that there is some sort of sharing of messages. This really has me scratching my head.
Likewise, as Jim says (May 6th, 2009 at 8:48 am ), concerning the whole “mark” of a congregational-led authority structure.
Is there blatant deception being given to Whitney, Sproul, Mohler, Dever? If not how is the SGM model of government possibly marketed as acceptable or “healthy” ?? How could Piper NOT know about one of his ‘disciples’ or colleagues leaving MN to go to CO for the replacing of a no longer gifted pastor?
“The congregation has real authority. It is also true that the Bible presents the local congregation as having the final say in matters of dispute, doctrine, discipline, and membership. The congregation exercises this authority for the maintenance of the Body’s health and for the accountability of the elders.”
May 7th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Preberterian
There can be a place IMO for “exhortation” that Mahaney seemed to always due but that should have been balanced with teaching. Like you I rarely saw him after quoting one passage of scripture go through and use various other passages to support his points.
When Larry Tomczak use to teach with C.J. Mahaney, Larry Tomczak did more teaching while Mahaney typically did exhortation. When Tomczak “left” what was called PDI at the time, that balance was lost.
As shared before, Mahaney apparently hasn’t studied the Greek in passages like Hebrews 13 where he teaches on submission. A lot is lost in the translation from Greek to English in that passage. Without this, Mahaney is teaching an imbalanced view of this passage IMO.
May 7th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
Sopwith,
I had to look up έντερα.
Don’t let my name fool ya… I’m like apple pie…
May 7th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
I’m tellling ya….
The big dogs DO NOT check up on each other.
They have no time, no interest and no authority to do so. Their own elders keep them in line.
What would make you think they would? It is not their job to do so.
They just go to the conference and try to keep jugggling all their ministry/family/friends/writing/sleeping balls in air all weekend, then they eat rubber chicken or go out to Starbucks or whatever and make small talk and deep talk.
But no one checks up on anyone else.
It is not their job.
It is their elders’ (and therefore, their congregants’ job) to check up on them.
SGM has no elders
That’s why they have no accountability.
May 7th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Ha, but they do have elders: If you ask them, they will tell you that the “elders” in SG churches are the pastoral team and the deacons are the care group leaders. Of course the “elders” do NOT come from the voice of the congregation; rather, they come from the recommendation of one of the already ‘elders,” the pastors already in place.
Here’s a real life example: A friend of mine “felt” a “call” to the ministry, so he made the sr. pastor aware. The sr. pastor placed him immediately as a care group leader. He handled that well, so off to the PC he went. He graduated from the PC, and now he is an ‘elder” in the SG machine. The congregation had zero official input–NONE!
May 7th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
RT-you’re right. I wish I would have realized this sooner.
May 7th, 2009 at 11:24 pm
RT,
The first thing that Brent did when he conquered…er…took over our church in the early eighties was to fire the only two Elders we had. They were truly our beloved Elders for long enough that they had to leave the church to quit being depended upon. No new Elders were ever appointed…
May 7th, 2009 at 11:43 pm
RT, Jim, I’m so disappointed. I don’t even know what to say.
I can understand not “checking up” on each other. But I can also understand having a personal interest – not to mention a self-interest – in who they associate with, in the name of caring about one’s own “famous” reputation!
Geeze, now I’m torn between pitying and disgust. CJ wins that round.
May 7th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Now one of Brent’s elders is his oldest son-are you serious!
May 8th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Didn’t Brent get deposed slightly around the same time as Shank? Something about gifting?
Is there a story on this site about Charlotte someplace?
May 8th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Hi Defended,
When SGM changed the name of the apostolic team to the leadership team, Brent and Shank did not remain on the leadership team. Shank is still on the apostolic team, which is now second tier. I’m told that Brent stepped down from everything to plant a church.
I ranted about the church plant here.
Not one of my finer moments. I really can’t listen to these guys when they talk about “mission”.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
For you listening pleasure and “encouragement,” I have been informed that the following are now available, FREE!
Sovereign Grace Pastors Conference
Seminars for Men
Seminars for Women
Here you go! click here
May 8th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Brent planted the Charlotte church without stepping “down” from the leadership team. Why would he have to leave the team to plant his new church?
As far as having his son be an elder, I don’t think a young man in his twenties can be considered mature or experienced enough for that position. Of course, he is probably under his dad’s thumb, and therefore qualified in SGM standards. I don’t mean to be harsh or criticial, but there it is.
May 8th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Brent is actually now just the Sr. Pastor of the new “church” plant. Gene Emerson is now the “apostle” over him (a reversal of roles). Here is the “church” plant web site. Brent was once Gene’s boss; not Gene is his boss–go figure!
May 8th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
G.D,
When the government talks about giving something to us for “free”, we all know it is not. SOMEONE paid the taxes. So, someone has to pay for these SGM conferences, even if it is not the attendees. Tithes, maybe? Church tax at its best. Guess I’m in the mood to throw a little birdseed, today. This kind of thing ruffles my feathers! But I’ll be good…
May 8th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Canary,
I kinda find you really enjoyable when you throw a little seed around. That is when you make your strongest points. tithe/church tax–yep, I fully agree with that one!!!
May 8th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Oh, I get it, G.D. Instead of paying to go, one can upload the teachings afterwards. Free. Duh…
May 8th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
May 8th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Yes, these conferences are far from free!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
May 8th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Canary!
Good to see you! How have you been?
May 8th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Ugh, is SGM able to have ANY women’s conference with speakers other than the esteemed Carolyn Mahaney and McCulley?
Can they go ONE conference without demonizing feminism?
Personally, I really kind of like that the early feminists got rid of that law allowing men to beat their wives.
But that’s just me.
May 8th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
Hi Happymom!
I’ve been good. Hope you and yours are well, too!
May 9th, 2009 at 12:30 am
Abby,
Huh…I’m glad that the law now protects women from beatings, too.
It’s amazing that our civil laws give us so much freedom, yet we allow churches to steal it away from us! I as a woman can make a statement with my vote in the U.S., but have no say in the direction my church goes in, nor am I allowed to have the privilege of praying for God’s mind on the important issues in a church body. Heck, most of the time we didn’t KNOW what direction the church was taking until we were TOLD by the leadership. We were signed up to follow whether we liked it or not. There simply has to be a balance when it comes to leadership and congregational oversight.
I am not a feminist, but I do appreciate what the early women’s sufferage movement brought to the kitchen table of womanhood. It is too bad that we seem to loose a lot of that respect and freedom upon entering the church building. I still scratch my birdbrain over that one.
May 9th, 2009 at 11:36 am
When I first taught Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s Declaration (1848), I was shocked by how relevant it still was to women in SGM–and other churches that embrace CBMW.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall.....falls.html
May 9th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Acme,
That was verrrrry interesting reading. Written in 1848, it is alarming in a sense that the requests for acknowledgement by our government of women as persons with rights was met, eventually, yet not in the church, for the most part, especially SGM. How would Elizabeth Stanton feel about that, I wonder? I pasted these two quotes below as words of interest:
“He has endeavored, in every way that he could, to destroy her confidence in her own powers, to lessen her self-respect, and to make her willing to lead a dependent and abject life.”
“He has usurped the prerogative of Jehovah himself, claiming it as his right to assign for her a sphere of action, when that belongs to her conscience and to her God.”
We women who are now experiencing or have experienced these very same injustices in the 21st century that were written by a 19th century woman, should be appalled. Our very own government is no longer allowed to treat women in the way that the SGM machine (indeed, many churches) has been allowed to do to its own female members. The sad thing is that, while a part of the system, I was not only (I believed) content with my lot, I did not understand how my spirit protested at the injustice I saw. How many of us ignored the inward cry that THIS IS WRONG, because leaders told us it was right?
But, many men were also treated in such a fashion. Not given the opportunity to pray for God’s mind on church direction, talents and gifts ignored, taught to follow the leader, men who wimped out or became drivers of their families… Just because one (whether man or woman) becomes a member of a church does not mean that he/she signs away their God given abilities to think for themselves, and to be individuals. As my husband told me, RUN from any church that requires complete, subserviant obedience to its leaders. We should learn from history.
Sorry, Jim and Carole, if I’ve sidetracked the conversation. Guess I’m still pondering in my own mind all the reasons that led to my own “enslavement” in the church. I have to add (thanks again, Acme) that the remarks in Acme’s link about women being “civilly dead” made me chuckle. My husband would have a good guffaw over that one. Though he definitely knows how to lead our family, he sees me as equally valuable, and my thoughts on issues definitely needed. Besides the Lord, My husband is the reason I survived my SGM experience!
I also want to add a big thanks to you, Jim, for giving women the same avenue to post on your blog as the men. Though you might not always agree with our thoughts, you have only treated us with respect and kindness. To be able to not only freely express our opinions, but to minister to others who come here, is an incredible experience for those of us who went many years thinking ourselves of no value to the Lord or His church. How wrong we were! Okay, I will cease my chirping and hand over the mic…
May 9th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Canary,
The conversation will go were it will-no problem with sidetracking or whatever…
Early on, watching commenters state beliefs that I disagree with was a challenge, because of the way I’m wired (IOW, I tend to think I’m right
). It’s been a good experience watching this very diverse group interact. I’m still a stick in the mud to the point that I need to say what I believe on the “about” page, and to state the obvious-that everyone here speaks for themselves-but it’s been been for me to remind myself what is essential, and what is secondary.
One great thing about being out here in what RT would call “normal land” is that I now have friends who are cessationist, hypercharismatic, egalitarian, anti-courtship, and the many other flavors in God’s family.
I probably sruggle with hypercharismatics the most, because I was one. Kinda like lighting up a cigarette around an ex smoker…
May 9th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
I feel more like a former bulimic having to be around food without binging or purging — because I am still a charismatic, but I now leave my intellect turned on.
But when I left SGM, my greatest difficulty was with Calvinist theology. Because of the actions of SGMers and lessons from the pulpit and Care Group, I believed God had predestined me to give up on my dreams, settle for a lowly subservient life, and seek out secret sin all day long. The idea that that was what he demanded of me or that was my destiny made me so sad and depressed. I supposed He didn’t want to fellowship with me, to walk with me in the cool of the garden. That was reserved for the Adams of the world, not the Eves. My job was to serve my man and lead a quiet life. BORING! So I rebounded against ole Cal and his ideas for a VERY long time. I think I’m fairly balanced now, but I still can’t attend a reformed church.
May 9th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Freedom Fighter,
I hear ya! Isn’t nice to have flavor in our lives, now? I just love it!
Jim,
I think we all are learning from each other on this blog to be patient and listen well to others who we might disagree with. We are learning diplomacy, as well as how to think through things to find the Lord’s mind on a matter.
I get what you mean about avoiding the over-doing of charasmania (new word!). I don’t think I was ever “hyper” charismatic. I am filled with the Holy Spirit, and thus experience the gift of discernment and sometimes prophecy, among others. I can pray in tongues, but do not. I need more understanding of it, in order to use it for God’s purpose. I cannot at this time worship in a cooperate setting because of bad memories of not worshipping in “spirit and in truth” (being forced to clap, dance, etc. by leadership). The Lord speaks to me in ways that often come from the silence. I am careful not to be led too often by emotion, but to think like Christ as much as I can. My husband, on the other hand, will blast music in his office, and often times be overcome by weeping in the spirit. He goes out to different churches in the area just for worship cooperately, then returns home before the teaching( (having been so over-taught in SGM). That is his way, his journey. We are both growing in the grace of God. We know there is more coming our way, so we wait patiently on the Lord.
Hope I’m not babbling. I think I’m trying to say that this blog has opened up the doors for many of us to experience each other’s thoughts and ideas, and to be open without being critical. We are changing. We see new things. We keep the good and throw out the bad. This group is functioning (in cyberspace) like the body of Christ. We encourage, exhort, edify, sometimes correct. We pray for each other with sincere love. I never experienced this sort of Body-life in SGM, not sincerely, except maybe in the early years.
Though I understand you might think, “this blog isn’t a church”, we individuals ARE the church. We are different parts of the body, learning to function together. Maybe it shouldn’t be enough. I just know that I’m growing, I’m edified, and inspired by the people who post here. Isn’t that how the church should function? Maybe I will find the courage to step out when the new wine skin shows itself, simply because I was allowed to step out here on the blog. Again, I have to thank you and Carole for making this possible. You really don’t know how much you are helping others. So I’ll keep reminding you! You both are slow to take any credit for the work you are doing. I promise there won’t be any standing ovation or gift certificates. Just a genuine respect for a job well done. Hugs!
May 9th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
Ummm….what my good friend Canary said? Goes for me, too.
Love yous guys!
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
May 22nd, 2009 at 12:11 am
As a SGM journeyman, I am thoroughly enjoying not having the weight of a CG after several years. No worries mate. Loving others and Jesus is my aim. My family & marriage is not to be sacrificed for Christian duty for any cause. Work & busyness were my main challenges, not our church. Our marriage was really helped by SGM folks who gave a rip about us enough to help me see how a Christian man is to treat his wife, as Jesus treats me. 20 years of marriage now. Changing still. Trying to. Went last week with two ancient SGM men and our sons to camp for a couple nights and had a blast trying to be mighty men. Men who run to the end with hearts and minds of faith. This is my third church. The others (a single elder Presby & a surprisingly Asburian UMC with resources) had problems of significance to say the least. I hear your concerns… Praise God, He alone saves us.
May 22nd, 2009 at 11:14 am
Hi Paul Balluff
Just a quick response to your post from 5/2/09 at 3:23pm
I must say it was mighty big of you to give your wife permission to talk to other women about her relationship with you
SGM calls that “gossip” – unless, of course, one has “permission” from the person involved!
In the real world you’re allowed to discuss your problems, whether it be with a church, your job, your spouse, etc with a friend. That’s normal. It’s not normal* to get “permission”.
Allow me to dramatize this a little bit.
Wife: “Honey, do you mind if I talk about my life, including my marriage (which involves you) with my friends? Because, honey, I gotta tell you, I think you’ve been acting like the guy in that movie again and so I’m feelin’ the need to talk to my church girlfriends. But you know what this will mean, don’t you? This will mean that others will realize you’re not being a GOOD LEADER again (loud gasp ) and that our marriage isn’t HEAVEN ON EARTH, which means that someone is stuck in their PRIDE again (the only underlying cause of any conflict in SGM). So, you won’t feel threatened if I talk to my friends, even if it means you will be asked to step down from leading the Care Group and undergo an intensive disciplinary process, will you Love?”
Husband: “Well, that’s ok Dear, because in the end, no matter what happens you’ll have to submit to me anyway regardless of whether or not I change, so it’s up to you. But do you really want others to think that you might be the problem? Are you open to your friends bringing you their “observations”? You might be off the hook for talking to them about our marriage in the first place (since I can say I gave you permission), but are you prepared to lose your status as a Care Group Leaders Wife? Because you know, Dear, in SGM, if you aren’t a Care Group Leaders Wife, or a Pastor’s Wife, you’re just a Stay-At-Home-Mom. Despite what you read on the Girltalk Blog, unless you also have an SGM-sanctioned CAREER as a Care Group Leader’s Wife or a Pastor’s Wife, you aren’t regarded, so it’s up to you!”
*when I say “normal” I mean in terms of discussing problems in an effort to figure them out, which helps to prevent unhealthy pressure and frustration from building up – which it does – even in the BEST of marriages. The scripture warns against women and men talking about other people when it doesn’t involve their own lives. If you are in a marriage, involved in a church, or you’re having problems with some area of your life, you shouldn’t feel like you should get permission to talk about those things. I realize that you were referring to a specific area that you gave your wife “permission” to talk to others about, but even that comes across as more of a threat than anything. It goes to show how SGM’ers think of it as tattle-telling or something! Ridiculous.
May 22nd, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Claireon,
Paul won’t be responding, as he and I have a few ground rules to work out.
In his defense, he did give his male friends “permission” as well, so I’m not sure he was speaking in the authoritative sense of the word.
I have no idea why I’m defending Paul, as he’s been very hard to reason with.
Just trying to be fair, I guess…
May 22nd, 2009 at 1:08 pm
lol Jim I think he has a hard enough time dealing with the fact that he and his wife are “Paul and Paula” (assuming Paul Balluff is his real name)
No, seriously…I hadn’t read the rest of his posts before I responded and missed seeing that you had moderated him. If I had, I probably would have taken it easy on the guy after seeing him unwind like he did.
I doubt he realizes he’s living in the SGM police state* and probably thinks it’s brutally unfair that you’re moderating him. I’m sure he thinks his “observations” of sin are correct. After all, he’s in SGM and they’re always right!
He can lambaste posters here for talking about SGM all he wants to, but I’m sure that if he were to have a real issue with SGM, he would discover that being placed in moderation on a blog were the least of his problems.
*police state – noun, a nation in which the police, esp. a secret police, summarily suppresses any social, economic, or political act that conflicts with governmental policy.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:12 am
dolous – never got a chance to answer a question you asked and since I am lost on blogs and the internet I cannot talk to you at your site
http://www.pastoroj.blogspot.com/
doulos
April 30th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Paul –
Exactly! The Gospel is the antidote to BOTH legalism and license. The work of Christ on the cross did not only destroy the penalty of sin, but also the power of sin in our lives. Therefore those who are in Christ by faith, are justified and being sanctified.
I wrote elsewhere:
The Gospel is neither legalistic nor licentiousness. But our natural tendency is to distort it to either error. Both legalism (or “Christian-moralism”) and licentiousness (or “antinomianism”) are earthly principles and fleshly, but the Gospel is heavenly revelation and Spiritual. Therefore, unless we conscientiously cling on to the Gospel by faith, we will slowly drift away from it and land on either side of the Cross. Thus the pure gospel is always in danger to be corrupted or perverted by our natural instinct and sinfulness.
doulos
May 3rd, 2009 at 11:46 pm
Just out of curiosity… what was your journey to Reformed faith? For example, in my case: I was saved in Charismatic background church (Arminian) and then later embraced Reformed faith without becoming a cessationist.
Doulos – I would like to answer that question if Jim would allow me on the site. It was definately a Damascus Road experience.
I was an Arminian’s Arminian and NO ONE was gonna shake my theology!
In Christ, Paul
And famagusta – please talk to me outside this blog
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:32 am
Hi Paul!
I have reset my blog so that I could receive emails. You will see the “envelope” icon next to “comments” at the end of each blog.
Take care!
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:36 am
Ooops. Sorry Paul, that “envelope” icon is not the email addressed to me, but for sending the post to others.
Here is my email address: doulos115@hotmail.com