Is this a Cult? *UPDATED*
It's been several days since I've posted-- my mind and time has been occupied with a situation that I am at a loss as to how (if even how) I should respond. In a nutshell, the 18-year-old daughter of some friends has decided to "join" a group known as Smith's Friends. I've been able to find a little bit on the internet about the group. On the surface, they sound like a "christian group"--they refer to themselves as The Christian Church (no association with the Restoration Movement churches, some having the same "name"). But some of the teachings I've read about don't ring true with my understanding of Scripture. Here are some links that I've read:
Some of the teachings (according to one website) are that Jesus was not God and He sinned unconsciously when He was on the earth. The site also claims the group teaches that Christ died for His own sins, as well as the sins of man. Current day leader, Sigurd Bratlie's teachings are accepted by Smith's Friends as infallible.
Several things concern me about this situation (NOTE: I'm speaking from information I've been told by the parents and close friends of the family). First, is how quickly the group was able to convince this girl to join them-- telling her, in essence, that the church she belonged to was not a true church and the things she had been taught by the church and her parents were not right. Second, they convinced the girl to move into their home, out of her dorm where she recently began attending college on a full scholarship. This girl is VERY intelligent-- she graduated at the top of her class; the scholarship was to a well known, private university. Yet, somehow...
The most disturbing thing to me is that the person that lulled her into this group is one that should be a trusted individual in our community. It appears that he has been "grooming" this girl for some time by giving her literature, etc. to help indoctrinate her. I spoke with another parent who said their son brought home some of the literature; that boy did not join the group.
The parents are devastated. Please pray for John and Joanie. Also pray that their daughter will have her eyes opened to this deception.
UPDATE 08-21-09 : Updated broken or dead links
1,940 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 1801 – 1940 of 1940Look at what apostles did after Jesus was crucified. They were scattered among the nations and simply told the truth about what they had witnessed. For that they were persecuted and martyred but they never took up arms against anyone. They just simply told their story. Their mission was to inform and educate people about Jesus Christ.
I think that is a key element of what is happening here on this blog. Informing and educating those willing to listen. The behavior of this SF leader and his family can be traced back to the teachings of SF. If somehow they can be reached with truth then their behavior can change. Even if some SF member out there has questions and stumbles across this blog maybe we can be part of the answer to his questions and then he may eventually find the truth. We may never know if that happens. It may have already happened.
Groups like the Mormons only exist when they can control the information their people listen to, the basic tenant of thought reform (or brainwashing). It is people like you who try to tell the truth, at least as far as you know it, that are considered so dangerous to the “church”. There was a professor of Mormon history at BYU who in 1993 was excommunicated by the Mormon church for daring to admit that the church leaders had been “less than honest” about certain historical events.
I have to admit that most people don’t want to take the time to ponder on these questions. It is much easier to have someone else tell them what to think. But when you do this you give up your freedom.
Giving it to God: As I had mentioned in an earlier post it appears like the ‘deny myself’ topic/idea is one of great relevance as it seems to be a key topic among SF members. The purpose for my question was to understand what you believe it means.
“Then Jesus said to them all: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me.” Luke 9:23
Some definitions for deny are: to refuse to recognize or acknowledge, disclaim connection with, allegiance to, or responsibility to or for, withhold, to restrain oneself from his own wishes and desires, restrain oneself, to turn down or give a negative answer to.
This verse could also be said like this, ‘If anyone would come after Me, he must ‘restrain himself from gratification of his own wishes and desires’ and take up his cross daily and follow Me’?
There are some individuals or groups of people who believe and teach this verse to mean that we should completely ‘deny’ ourselves of our physical needs such as food, clothing, shelter to the point of starvation or eating out of garbage cans, deprive themselves of sleep, giving up living in a home, hurt themselves even to the point of flogging themselves as is depicted in ‘The DaVinci Code’ as if those things make us more Christ-like/more serious about God or better, more serious Christians/reconciled to God.
There are others who might interpret this verse to mean we must ‘deny’ ourselves of any type of material possessions like vacations, swimming pools, hot tubs, nice vehicles, motorcycles, makeup, jewelry, televisions, nice clothing– his/her own family and friends and instead always giving to the ‘church’ whether it be time, money, energy. I think so many people think giving time, money, and energy to their ‘church’ is the same as giving to God. It isn’t.
Then there are still others who believe and teach that we can’t follow Jesus unless we ‘deny’ ourselves of things that should be important to us as individuals such as our own family, the very people who should be important in our life-the same ones Jesus tells us to honor, respect, and love, the same one who have had value and importance forming lifelong relationships, the same ones who sacrificed and invested in us to get us where we are in life. There are those who believe and teach that in order to be a follower of Jesus, we must lose/give up/deny our own friends, our own identity and uniqueness, our own interests, our own place to live. I believe this is another verse that can be twisted and used in order to get others to ‘give up/deny’ their own individualism and interests with the belief that they are a more serious Christian, a better Christian in God’s eyes and better than others if they give up everything of importance to them. I do not believe this verse indicates that we must flog ourselves, hate or hurt ourselves, show hatred and contempt to others who have been such a vital part of our lives by ‘dying’ to the emotional ties and feelings that we have formed over a lifetime for our own family and friends and then suddenly become attached to someone else’s family just because we are part of the same ‘church’. I don’t think it means that we have to deny ourselves of make-up, and jewelry, pants, shorts, or televisions/other modern technology in order to be more serious about glorifying God and loving Jesus.
I do believe this verse indicates that every second of every day, we have choices to make. We can choose to follow Jesus Christ (take up my cross) every day and deny (restrain; hold back; control) ourselves from the sinful desires that satan loves to tempt us with or we can choose to give in to the temptations of sin. We can choose to humble ourselves and acknowledge our need of a Savior or we can choose to continue living in pride and deny our need for a Savior (who took the punishment we deserve for our sin) believing we can get to heaven another way. We can choose to tell the truth or choose to lie; we can choose to unite people or choose to divide people by the very words, actions, and behaviors that we choose to use toward others; we can choose love like Jesus did or hate like satan did for everyone; we can choose to be patient or impatient; we can choose to have self control or allow ourselves to have no self control, we can choose to make threats, intentionally attempt to intimidate and cause fear in others or choose to show kindness, gentleness, humility; we can choose to share our resources of time and finances with others who may be in need or hurting (even those who aren’t part of our ‘church’ and don’t believe just like we do) or we can choose to be selfish and act as if those outside ‘our own church’ don’t matter to God (which is a lie from satan); we can choose to respect people and the relationships they have with their own family and friends or we can choose not to respect the relationships of others and demonstrate this by moving them into our home which separates them from their own friends and family, and then threaten and assault their family.
No matter which way one interprets this verse, it leaves one wondering: what has this school teacher/SF leader given up/’denied’? Has he ‘denied’ his relationship with his own family and the people in ‘his church’? Has he denied himself of material possessions such as a nice home, clothing, vehicle, and travel? Has he denied his own personal comfort by skipping meals, eating out of a garbage can, being homeless, flogging himself, giving up some of his personal comforts in order to help someone who doesn’t belong to his church with no intention of ‘recruiting’ them into his church? Has he really ‘denied’ himself of (had victory over) sin?
What do the leading brothers give up/deny to bring others to know Jesus Christ-not join Brunstad, but know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior who reconciles us to our Creator, God, the Father? A true follower of Jesus doesn’t form relationships with people with the intent of benefitting from them by the other person sacrificing their time, energy, and resources. A true follower of Jesus Christ has the intent of benefitting, helping and leading other people to Jesus (not necessarily to our same church) but to Jesus. There is a huge difference.
“but I'm done with the worldly tv programs”
If you are “done with the worldly tv programs” by the leading of the Holy Spirit and you make that decision because you think those programs are a waste of the time you could be doing something that would bring more glory to God, or because those programs cause you to sin, or whatever your reason, if it is because YOU choose to do away with the programs, that’s ok. I’m not advocating television because I don’t watch that much of it myself. I just know that a ‘church’ has no business setting guidelines for if we do or don’t own a television and if we watch it or not, what we do, who we do it with, what we wear, if we wear make-up and jewelry or if we don’t. If we are Christian, the Holy Spirit will lead us, guide us, and sanctify us-not rules and regulations put into place by the ‘church’ leading brothers or anyone else for that matter. That should be between a believer and God.
And the leading brothers probably don’t come right out and say, “You can’t wear make-up or watch television.” They most likely say things more along the lines of “Television is of the world, of satan. Serena is a very godly, mature Christian because she has given up watching television and gives her money to the church.” And they may hit that one very hard until suddenly everyone has fallen into line and become what they consider to be very godly mature Christians by giving up owning a television and gives their money to the church. All the while, giving up a television or giving our money to ‘the church’ isn’t going to reconnect us with God and get us into heaven. Giving up wearing make-up isn’t going to reconnect us to God. The only way to reconnect to God is by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, who said,
“‘Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger’s voice.’ Jesus used this figure of speech, but the Pharisees did not understand what he was telling them. Therefore Jesus said again, ‘Very truly I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep. All who have come before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep have not listened to them. I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. They will come in and go out, and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.’” John 10:1-10.
“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.” Matt. 7:13-14.
Harold said, “The big difference with cults is they recruit people through lies, deceptions, and coercion. This girl joined a group that she believed were more serious mainstream Christians. That was a deception.”
Harold, I agree, with you. When someone signs up to be a part of the military, although they do make sacrifices, they are being PAID to do a job. Along with that PAID position, sometimes the person is separated from family and friends while on the job of protecting our country. In a coercive, cultic group, the members are usually the ones working and making the sacrifices in order to fund/give to the group, not the other way around. When someone signs up to be a part of the military, they know ahead of time there most likely are sacrifices of being away from family involved. Those are no secret. Many times, we see these on the front pages of a newspaper. And, usually the whole family is there to see them off or greet them as they return. The family is not ridiculed, criticized, demonized by the superiors in the military with the sole intent of separating them from the soldier. They are included in the soldier’s life.
Harold: “The behavior of this SF leader and his family can be traced back to the teachings of SF.”
I agree with this too. It cannot be ‘just a coincidence’ that other people in other parts of the world have witnessed and experienced similar behaviors from Smith’s Friends/Brunstad members. These members all have one common denominator and that is the teachings of this ‘church’. A while back you mentioned that this girl’s family had been assaulted at their daughter’s wedding by the sons of this SF local leader. Millard asked you to describe the assault which you did. But, what I’m interested in is the ‘why’ this girl’s family was assaulted. What was the purpose of that? What had they done to deserve this?
FYI
http://ianvincent.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/smiths-friends/
These are guys from the sect's branch in Alwaye who visited this guy. This is exactly how Smith's Friends work - they go to people who are happy in Christ and try to make them unhappy and then draw them to the cult. The leader in Alwaye is one Gabriel. He is absolutely loyal along with one Mathew George to the headquarters in Brunstad. All of them are well conditioned and brainwashed by the Norwegians and encourage the few in the sect to have no connections with other Christians unless it is to draw them into the sect. This is what they mean by "evangelism".
How much to deny myself and take up my cross and follow jesus has been contues to be a struggle for me. I feel guilty for some the fun things I do in the day (parafoil kite flying, saunaing, etc. etc.) always worrying if I ain't suffering in the flesh enough. (maybe I'm being ridiculous right now but these are my kooky worries every single day, and every single day I feel I've po'd god - well He ain't been answering my prayers he must be mad I recogn) But anyways, a uh cult exit website I found to be helpful.........very much entails all the tactics I found to be used by kare smith and his cult http://www.exitsupportnetwork.com/artcls/mindctrl/marks.htm
Sophie, you are asking a question that would be hard for me to answer since I’m not in the group. All I can do is speculate. But I do know that this was not the only incident when this SF church threatened or attempted to scare the girl’s family.
One way to control people is through fear and intimidation. They don’t really want this girl to have any contact with her own family so if they can scare her family enough they can drive a psychological wedge in between them. Some families would take the position that, if those are the kinds of people that she wants to hang with then to heck with her, we don’t want to have anything to do with her. The girl herself probably doesn’t know everything that happened and if her family turned their back on her, she might believe that her family doesn’t really love her and she doesn’t even know why. This kind of scenario would be just what the cult leader would want so that he and the cult members would be right there to feed that deception that her family didn’t love her like they did.
If you look through scripture and think about the appearances of demons, there are certain behaviors that characterize those encounters.
“News about him spread all over Syria, and people brought to him all who were ill with various diseases, those suffering severe pain, the demon-possessed, those having seizures, and the paralyzed…” Mat 4:24
“When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes, two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way. “Mat 8:28
“A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.” Mat 15:22
“For Jesus had commanded the impure spirit to come out of the man. Many times it had seized him, and though he was chained hand and foot and kept under guard, he had broken his chains and had been driven by the demon into solitary places.” Luke 8:29
“Even while the boy was coming, the demon threw him to the ground in a convulsion.” Luke 9:24
These various encounters of demons are characterized by things like sickness, fear, suffering, violence, deception, and isolation.
“The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.” 1Tim 4:1
Contrast that with the many encounters that Jesus had with various people, people of all kinds, Jews and gentiles, the sinners and the righteous.
“Jesus answered, ‘Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.’ The woman said to him, ‘Sir, give me this water so that I won’t get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water.” John 4:15
“When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him.” Mark 5:6
“As soon as all the people saw Jesus, they were overwhelmed with wonder and ran to greet him.” Mark 9:15
“When he saw Jesus, he fell with his face to the ground and begged him, “Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean.” Luke 5:12
“When he saw Jesus passing by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!” John 1:36
“After the people saw the sign Jesus performed, they began to say, “Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 6:14
What was the reaction that people had when they encountered Jesus? Would this be best described by the fruits of the spirit? Love, joy, peace, kindness, goodness,…etc. Is it any wonder that Jesus said “By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.” Mat 7:16-18
Happy: Welcome to the conversation. I had read Ian’s blog some time ago. There have been many comments on this blog by the SF group that try hard to present the idea that these events in Owasso are isolated, and are just a localized dispute between this poor girl and her psychotic parents. But it is interesting that there are these stories around the world that exhibit similar characteristics from the SF members and they usually involve fear, hate, and deceptions.
So is the anything in particular that brought you to this blog?
Happy said: “These are guys from the sect's branch in Alwaye who visited this guy. This is exactly how Smith's Friends work - they go to people who are happy in Christ and try to make them unhappy and then draw them to the cult.”
“This is what they mean by "evangelism".”
Testimony has been giventhroughout this blog that SF as a whole, iscritical of anyone outside their ‘church’ and exclusive. By criticizing and focusing on anything wrongor negative about other ‘churches’ or other Christ followers,even referring to them as harlots and hypocrites, theycause dissension and divisionamongChristians. It is becoming apparent that they also see nothing wrong with breaking families apart. Then by building themselves up and talking about howgodly, spiritual, serious, righteous they are, calling themselves ‘The Bride of Christ’, they‘draw them to the cult’. This so called ‘evangelism’ seems to be very profitable for ‘the church’.The more people working and giving to the ‘church’, more money is generated for Brunstad. Perhaps this is why, “All of them are well conditioned and brainwashed by the Norwegians and encourage the few in the sect to have no connections with other Christians unless it is to draw them into the sect.”Maybe one reason ‘the Norwegians’ don’t want members to have connections with other Christians is because they may actually figure out how their leading brothers have twisted and perverted the gospel of Christ. This combined with statements like, ‘If you leave our church, something bad will happen to you,’ keeps members ‘psychologically locked in’. They don’t want to lose their financial backing.
I believe you’re correct in stating that ‘this is exactly how SF’s work’. In the introduction to this blog site, Keith stated, “Several things concern me about this situation (NOTE: I'm speaking from information I've been told by the parents and close friends of the family). First, is how quickly the group was able to convince this girl to join them-- telling her, in essence, that the church she belonged to was not a true church and the things she had been taught by the church and her parents were not right. Second, they convinced the girl to move into their home, out of her dorm where she recently began attending college on a full scholarship.”
Your comments about the guys in Alwaye are consistent with the story in Owasso. This ‘church’ leader/school teacher was ‘evangelizing’ a girl in his class by telling her that things she had been taught in her family’s church and by her own parents were not right. Was he ‘evangelizing’ to lead her to Christ, or to alienate her from people that should be important in her life - her parents, and her family and friends and draw her into Smiths’ Friends/Brunstad? Why move her into his home if not to separate her from her family, friends, and other Christians? Didn’t she already have a place to live?
God’s Word instructs us to honor our parents. Honor means to show high regard or appreciation for; pay tribute to; exalt, praise, outward respect or admiration, to be a credit to.
Exodus 20:12, “Honor (show high regard or appreciation for, pay tribute to, exalt, show outward respect or admiration of, be a credit to) your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you.”
Deuteronomy 5:16, “Honor your father and your mother, as the Lord you has commanded you, so that you may live long and that it may go well with you in the land the Lord your God is giving you.”
Matt. 15:3-9, “Jesus replied, ‘And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’ But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ he is not to ‘honor his father’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you: ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.’
Ephesians 6:2, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor your father and mother”-which is the first commandment with a promise- “that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth.”
Turning against one’s own family, moving in with, and morphing into someone else’s family just because one attends the same ‘church’, emotionally alienating oneself from, and/or lying to one’s own family wouldn’t be acts considered to be demonstrative of honoring one’s parents or having a relationship built on trust, truth, honesty, honor, and respect. This teacher/SF church leader not only taught and encouraged, but also enabled this girl to alienate, turn against, and dishonor her God-given family. It is apparent that he has no respect for others and their relationships with their own families. How is that being a more godly, righteous, serious, and spiritual Christian? How is that being Christ-like?
Giving it to God: “How much to deny myself and take up my cross and follow jesus has been contues to be a struggle for me. I feel guilty for some the fun things I do in the day (parafoil kite flying, saunaing, etc. etc.) always worrying if I ain't suffering in the flesh enough.”
This is the problem with trying to ‘earn’ salvation. We would constantly be struggling, worrying, and feeling guilty about how much is ever enough? If our salvation is based on belonging to the right group, doing enough, being good enough, denying enough, suffering enough, wearing the right clothes, attending enough ‘church’ functions, then how much is ever ‘enough’ to be saved? ‘How much’ does it cost to gain favor with God and earn our salvation?
Luke 9:25-26, “For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.”
Acts 4:12, “And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.”
Acts 10:43, “Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him has received forgiveness of sins.”
Colossians 1:13-14, “For He delivered us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.”
Hebrews 7:26-27, “For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily, like those high priest, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins, and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.”
1 John 4:14, “And we have beheld and bear witness that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.”
1 John 5:5, “And who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?”
1 John 5:12, “He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.”
It is clear to me from scripture that salvation is a gift. You can’t suffer enough, give up enough….Jesus suffered FOR us; He paid the price for our sins. That means we should deny ourselves of sin-we are to live IN the world, but not OF the world. We still live in the world so we are called to interact with others, show love to others, and win others to Christ, but we don’t have to participate in sin. When we live in the world, do we have to give up our own interests, recreational activities, hobbies, travel, talents, even our own life, etc so that we can suffer for Jesus? If we completely deny ourselves of everything, how are we going to interact with the world, show love to others, and win others to Christ? If the activities you’re involved with interfere with your relationship with Christ or cause a division between you and Jesus and result in sin, then the Holy Spirit will work on your heart and you will know what to do. But, just having interests is not sinful. God created us in His image with a brain and the potential for creativity and interest in life here on this earth.
If we really think we have to suffer in order to gain salvation, why don’t we find ourselves suffering on a cross as did Jesus? Jesus dying on a cross for our sins was God’s perfect plan for us.
I agree w/ya sophie. (a cult will leave a person real messed up for a long time I have found) I have a fresh blog post me disagreeing with this silly idea stated by Anna Risa on www.brunstad.org """All the unrest I feel in any situation always comes from my own lusts, and never on the actions of others.""""
I prove that to be biblically not even correct, jesus mentions that when he was reviled he didn't revile back (he was reviled and he knew it ------- it I don't think is a matter of ones lusts in the flesh to not enjoy being reviled who's going to enjoy that???????? I don't think jesus enjoyed that or that we are called to actually enjoy being reviled and treated badly ----- we just not supposed to revile back) I'm not a robot, I guess ya the smith's friends are robots, I found them to be robotic, but I'm a real person, jesus was I think a real person, real feelings that surely got hurt and I don't think that is some sin to feel hurt?????????? just not revile back) like some kind of ubber ubber super saintliness that doesn't even exist the smith's friends are trying to accomplish. It's ok to feel hurt I think - isn't it???????? To all have feelings. (((I think when jesus was reviled, he felt something, it couldn't of felt great to be reviled - it couldn't of felt great for him --- it's just clean human to be a bit uh upset or I guess you can use the word "unrest" that being the word Anna Risa uses........you were reviled, your not supposed to be having inside your heart a supper happy happy party nah feel some pain, feel some hurt, maybe even unrest over the situation but don't revile back I think that's the idea ------- and if I feel unrest I don't think well know my flesh is just way out of hand no I was reviled!!!!!! Or beaten or whatever. It isn't a cheery happy camp time in the alice of wonderland rabbit hole when I'm reviled)
http://givingittogod.blogspot.com/2011/05/i-pray-for-smiths-friends.html
Regarding Anna Risa and her “unrest”.
GTG: You bring up a good point about Anna Risa’s comments. Anna’s comments focus on our natural tendencies to self-preservation and to blame others for our problems. She makes good sense if we stay with idea that we should be responsible for our own actions. If we do or say something that hurts others, as mature adults and followers of Jesus Christ we should, as far as we are able to, admit our mistakes and repent (that is to quit doing those things).
However Anna has to summarize it this way “All the unrest I feel in any situation always comes from my own lusts, and never on the actions of others.” This is where you (GTG) and I see through the veiled curtain of the Smith’s Friends twisted logic, much like any other cult that ever existed, which goes something like this: If the leader of the group does something to you that you don’t like then YOU have a problem and YOU need to forgive HIM.
Take the case of Roch Theriault who was the leader of a Canadian group near Toronto. He was investigated and eventually convicted of the mutilation and murder of some of his own members. Why did so many of followers stay with him after he murdered one of his wives, multilated another, castrated several male members, and many stories of sexual deviancy?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roch_Theriault
Anna Risa’s comment gives some insight to this question. Roch and the members of his group believed he was the reincarnation of the prophet Moses and that God spoke to him and he demanded complete obedience to himself (not necessarily to God).
Here is an excerpt from http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1300501
“One day, he became enraged at Claude Ouellette for some reason no one remembers, and ordered him to walk around with an elastic band wrapped tightly around his scrotum. Claude kept it on overnight, which caused irreparable damage to his testicles – which, of course, prompted Theriault to operate: he used a razor blade to cut open Claude's scrotum and plucked out an infected testicle with his fingers, then cauterized the wound with a hot piece of iron. Then, he held a vote to determine whether Claude should be stoned to death for offending God.”
Claude obeyed the leader which caused him harm, but HE was the one who was charged with offending God because of his “unrest”. Roch didn’t take any responsibility for causing harm to his follower. He didn’t have the problem, Claude did. Can you see the twisted logic of a narcissist here?
The SF church group here in Owasso follows the same kind of twisted logic. They were able to gain undue influence over a young teenage girl and convince her of lies about her family intentionally causing damage to her family while their attitude, as communicated through other SF postings on this blog, is to play the victim and blame the girl’s family for anything they can dream up. They have the audacity to threaten the girl’s family with legal action because they dared to speak out and tell the truth much like Friedrich Griess.
Any good cult needs to be a victim of something so they can instill fear in their members. Fear is the control mechanism. Fear of going to hell if you leave the group. Fear that something bad will happen if you leave or disobey the leadership. Fear that you will be punished or publicly ridiculed (within the group) for not following the rules. The rules usually change frequently so that nobody can ever know all the rules and will eventually get caught in disobedience and punished for something.
In John Chapter 10, Jesus compares himself to satan; “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.”
Giving it to God: I would also like to make a comment regarding the article written by Anna Risa which you referenced in your last post. I agree with Harold’s comment in which he said that some of what she stated in her article ‘makes good sense’. One statement she made is “the lusts in my flesh express themselves, tempting me to lie, backstab and blame others.”
1 Peter 5:8 says, “Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour”.
Because sin entered the world, we live in a fallen world where satan ‘prowls around’ tempting all of mankind to sin. There are those who may refer to temptation as ‘lust in the flesh’. Temptation to sin doesn’t come from Jesus, but from satan. I believe that pride is one thing satan uses to tempt us to ‘lie, backstab, and place blame’ and fault on others rather than humble ourselves and accept responsibility for our own actions and place blame where it rightfully belongs. And as Anna Risa points out in her article, we see this type of behavior in the beginning of time in the garden with Adam and Eve.
Due to pride we don’t want anyone to think less of us. If we admit that we’ve made a mistake or sinned against someone, admitting it may change what others think about us. We know that people aren’t quite as accepting and forgiving as God is, so out of fear of what others may think, we put on a façade rather than just be transparent. We want others to think we’re better, smarter, more perfect, more righteous, more holy, more creative, more athletic….I think we could state with certainty that every human being has been guilty of trying to appear as something they’re not or attempting to cover something up at least once in his/her life. We might be able to deceive, fool, hide things from others, but we can’t deceive, fool, or hide from God. Adam and Eve tried hiding from God, but couldn’t. God knows our inmost thoughts and feelings. He sees our behavior, actions, and our hearts. That’s why He sent Himself in human likeness to do what we cannot-be a perfect sacrifice for the sins of the whole world.
“For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” Rom. 3:23.
“What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and gentiles alike are all under sin. As it is written: There is no one righteous, not even one,” Romans 3:9-10.
But, I also agree with your opposition to the statement in which Anna said, "ALL the unrest I feel in any situation ALWAYS comes from my own lusts, and NEVER on the actions of others."
So, from this statement can we conclude that if I am beaten, raped, and robbed, and as a result feel ‘unrest’ as a consequence of someone else sinning against me, it comes from MY lust and not because another person (who is also a sinner) violated me? If I come to your house and steal something from you and you then feel ‘unrest’ about it, is it because YOU have ‘lust’ or is it because you were violated by someone else who is a sinner? If someone is killed by an intoxicated driver and the victim’s family feels ‘unrest’ because they lose a loved one, is it because they ‘lust’ or because they have God-given emotions and feel the pain of losing someone they love dearly-their own child? If someone throws rocks at you and your child and then you feel ‘unrest’, is it because you were treated poorly, hurt, wronged by a group of people who claim to be more serious Christians or because you have ‘lusts’?
When God created us in His image, He gave us emotions which are there for us to FEEL things such as love, happiness, joy, peace, grief, sorrow, loneliness, unrest, disturbed, frustrated, and yes, even anger. He also gave us a brain and a conscience to know right from wrong. Having emotions and feeling ‘unrest’ may come as a result of someone else’s sin and not necessarily because the victim has ‘lust’. Where does personal accountability come into play?
Harold brought up a cult leader named Roch Theriault in which this type of ‘self-preservation’ behavior was taken to a perverted extreme. But, most likely we have all witnessed this ‘self-preservation’ type of behavior at one time or another-the blaming, lying, backstabbing, and criticizing others in order to take the focus off of what we did wrong, blame someone else, or to make oneself look better in someone else’s eyes. This can happen in all types of relationships, familial, friendships, marriages, employment that may not be categorized as cultic in nature, but just people who refuse to accept their own faults and imperfection and want to appear something they really aren’t.
There is sin in the world and there are those who make choices to ‘give in’ to satan’s schemes and temptations and violate others by bringing them harm rather than to follow and honor God with truth and love for Him and for others. This ideology of “All the unrest I feel in any situation always comes from my own lusts, and never on the actions of others,” fails to hold the perpetrator accountable and is an attempt to place guilt on the violated when he/she has feelings of ‘unrest’ due to being wronged/violated/harmed by others. I agree that we shouldn’t ‘lie, backstab, and blame others’ when we’ve wronged, hurt, or violated someone else. But, it is not a sin for the wronged, hurt, violated party to speak the truth about something that has taken place. The wronged party shouldn’t be made to feel guilty and silenced.
I might agree with her sentence if it read something more like this, ‘The unrest I feel in some situations may come from my own lusts, but sometimes my unrest may result from someone else’s sin. If I have sinned and wronged someone, I should accept responsibility for my own actions, humble myself, apologize (confess my sins to those I have sinned against), and repent (stop engaging in the sin) rather than ‘lie, backstab, and blame others’ in order to cover up my sin.’
U.S. Congressman Weiner from New York has been in the news very recently for this very type of behavior. He did some inappropriate things and then when those things were made public, instead of admitting what he had done, he tried to lie, cover it up, and even blame innocent people for his wrongdoing. Was the ‘unrest’ of those he lied about and attempted to blame due to their lust or due to Congressman Weiner’s unacceptable and inappropriate behavior?
As the Bible tells us, none of us is perfect, we are all sinners, and God is interested in the condition of our heart. I believe that God is interested in how we handle ourselves when we do sin. Do we continue in that same sin and try to hide it by ‘lying, backstabbing, and blaming others’? Or do we repent to God and go make it right with those whom we’ve sinned against? Or do we continue in pride and never admit that we’re a sinner in need of a Savior and the forgiveness of God?
John 13:34-35, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”
John 8:23, “…and you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.”
Proverbs 28:13 "He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy." I confess all kinds of sins on clean my blog these days : ) hhahahahahahah but it is the way of the world to not confess your sins to try and keep a good reputation going. I'm of the switchfoot bands mentality I'm guilty and I'm turning myself in (they have a song about that)!
http://givingittogod.blogspot.com/2011/06/im-convinced-god-doesnt-want-us-to-be.html
I regularly go to www.brunstad.org it's like a horror movie to me....well some their posts are ok can't find nothing do do do do bump in the night about........but this one ahhhhhhhh http://www.brunstad.org/en/christian-video/life-that-can-be-touched-and-handled
This brother said, "something came over me, I can't even explain it" I was sitting there while watching this like uhhhhhhhh RUN!!!!!!!!! I directly quote him later in this video "You don't sense a spirit which tries to draw you down, but a spirit that really wants to push you forward, and to run ahead and not just give up." I took big time note, of his using the words "a spirit" I don't think he was using the words "a spirit" on accident there! Cause when I was in this church I also sensed that spirit, pushing me forward, and it wasn't the holy spirit, it was "a spirit" I'm so thankful I got out of that cult.
Giving it to God: On your blog, you made a statement about freedom from addiction and bondage. Although I’m not sure which addiction you’re referring to in your post, I do know there are many different types of addictions. Most people are familiar with addictions such as alcohol and drugs. But, there are also other addictions which may not be quite as obvious but can still put people into bondage. Some include pornography, chocolate, exercise, eating disorders, working, self-infliction, shopping, cleaning house, sports, and television. Some people become addicted to other people and/or religion.
People can have beliefs, customs, rules, addictions, and other things which may cause deviant behavior and sometimes put them into bondage. Sometimes these things happen because a person is attempting to fill a void or comfort oneself. If a person experiences a tragic event in his/her life, sometimes that person may become addicted to something that brought him/her comfort at the time of the event. But sometimes these addictions happen because of wrong teachings, wrong information, and/or lies. Satan is the father of all lies and he delights in trapping people and putting them into bondage. He uses lies, deceptions, half truths, and misinformation in order to accomplish his mission.
There are those who believe that ‘God wants us to be happy’. There are others who believe that in order to be a Christian, we must suffer. Some believe unrepentant sin in one’s life results in something bad happening to that person. There are those who believe that wearing a head covering, no makeup, no jewelry makes one more righteous. Some believe in order to be a Christian, we mustn’t watch television. There are those who believe that going to church makes them a Christian. Some even believe that in order to be a Christian, one must belong to a particular ‘church’ or group. They believe they are the only ones with the truth, that all who don’t belong are harlots so they won’t spend time with those outside of their ‘church’. There are those who believe that their church leaders are above reproach, infallible, and should be trusted, respected, and obeyed, even when they do things that lead people in a direction away from what the Word of God says. They have been trapped under a leaders’ authority rather than freed under the authority of Christ. They believe disobedience to a leader is the same as disobedience to Christ. The only mediator we as Christians need is Jesus Christ.
There are people and groups of people who live by man-made rules, beliefs, customs, traditions, and regulations such as these (and others) rather than ‘by faith’ in a Savior. These types of beliefs and practices have little or nothing to do with faith in Jesus, but rather allegiance and devotion to church leaders and their teachings, church activities, and church work. Sometimes people become convinced that their adherence to rules and regulations is what makes them more righteous than other Christians. This ‘churchiology’ can become addictive. One can actually get the feeling of a ‘high’ from it.
When Jesus was here on the earth, He had a ministry in which He loved people by talking with and listening to them, sharing with and healing them, speaking truth, teaching, and forgiving them. He gave of Himself in order to meet the needs of others. The religion of Christianity revolves around faith in and worship of Jesus Christ, the begotten Son of God. Scripture teaches that believers are the ‘body of Christ’. As part of that ‘body’, shouldn’t we, as Christians, do our part to help the ‘body’ function properly? We shouldn’t do this in order to gain something for ourselves, but because we adore, worship, love Jesus so much that we show love to others (those inside and outside of our own congregation) – to demonstrate to others who Jesus is. We are Christ’s representatives/ambassadors, 2 Corinthians 5:16-21.
The Bible teaches that we are ‘justified’ by what was done for us on the cross – something we cannot do for ourselves. He paid that price for us. If we died the very second after we accepted and believed Jesus to be our Savior, because we have an awesome, forgiving, loving, powerful God, we would have an eternal home in heaven, not because of what we did (other than accept and believe in Him as our Savior), but because of what HE did-He gave of Himself-His Perfect Son, to pay the price for our sins.
Luke 5:31, “Jesus answered them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”
Luke 23:40, “But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said,” since you are under the same sentence? We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.” Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” Jesus answered him, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with Me in paradise.”
John 6:28-29, “Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires? Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one He has sent.”
Romans 3:21-26, “But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in His blood. He did this to demonstrate His justice, because in His forbearance He had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished – He did it to demonstrate His justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.”
Galatians 2:20, “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained though the law, Christ died for nothing.”
But, if after we are ‘justified’ by the blood of Christ, we continue to live in our mortal bodies on earth, as the Holy Spirit works in us a process known as ‘sanctification’ begins. By being obedient to Christ and getting to know Him through studying God’s Word and time in prayer, we should be able to be recognized as Christ followers by our actions, virtues such as love, forgiveness, joy, peace, patience, goodness, care and compassion, mercy, grace, kindness, self-control, gentleness, generosity, speaking truth, respect for others (even those who aren’t part of our ‘church’).
1 Peter 4:8, “Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins.”
I believe ‘church’ can happen wherever God’s children (those who believe and have faith in Jesus Christ as their Savior) are. ‘Church’ can happen in a building, on the street, in a park, on a hillside, a backyard, a grocery store, an office, a lake, a river, the beach, a mountain, a concert, and on any continent. When we walk as Jesus did, in love, witnessing to and teaching others by our words and actions, we are sharing the love of Jesus, which is what Christians are called to do.
1 John 4:7-12, “Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. This is how God showed his love among us; He sent His one and Only Son into the world that we might live through Him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and His love is made complete in us.”
Some equate attending ‘church’, listening to someone preach, serving in church or being involved in church outings, activities, and Bible studies with being a Christian who is saved by the love, mercy, and grace of God and having a relationship with Jesus. They become ‘addicted’ to the members in their church and what their church leaders teach rather than Jesus and what the Bible teaches. Some believe and teach that their group is more Christ-like or more serious Christians and they only associate with others in their church group. There are many people who attend church services and/or belong to ‘a church’ but are not a Christian and there are those who don’t attend church services but are Christians. It’s not how often we attend church, do things with our church group, listen to church leaders, read materials from our church, that makes one a Christian.
There are many Christians who place great importance on what others have to say about scripture. Reading selections, articles, books, etc. written by Christian authors can be interesting, informative, and educational. But should we place more value, importance, and time memorizing others’ writings and their interpretations of the Bible than what the Word of God, The Bible, actually says? I believe relying on others to tell us what God’s Word means can put people into bondage, especially if all the information/writings comes from people within the same organization or ‘church group’.
There are many churches who host Bible competitions as a method to help people memorize the Bible. Smiths’ Friends/Brunstad holds a ‘Church Literature Competition’. Their competition is memorization of some of their leaders’ interpretation of God’s Word. This is another reason why it appears that this group places more importance on what its’ leaders say about God’s Word than actually on God’s Word itself.
We can become ‘bound’ by fear, hatred of anyone outside our group, feelings of superiority that we are ‘The chosen Bride of Christ’. The people of Jonestown, The Branch Davidians, Warren Jeffs (Mormon) are some well known examples of this. The people in these groups lived in bondage to another person’s teachings and interpretations of scripture. They were in bondage by fear, hate, and the belief that they were the only ones with the truth. One method of keeping people in bondage is to eliminate or limit any meaningful associations with people, even family and friends, who are outside the group. Their leaders used fear and hate of anyone outside their group as mechanisms to keep them bound to their group or ‘church’.
Some people put so much importance and trust in someone who they think is godly and righteous, that they forget that he/she is only human too. They are influenced by that person’s teachings and leadership to the point of surrendering much of who God created them to be, including the freedom to have any substantial relationships with family or friends who aren’t part of the group. They are obedient to a human leader rather than obedient to Christ as if they are one and the same. Rather than being in the scriptures and allowing the Holy Spirit to instruct, lead, and guide them, they place veneration upon another human to lead them. This can be an addiction to another person or group and its teachings.
The idea of becoming perfect here on this earth is another lie from satan, a trap of always striving to ‘follow the law’ or be ‘good enough’ to gain God’s approval. But, everyone has different ideas of what ‘perfection’ is. If we attempt to live up to someone’s idea of perfection, then we are in bondage to a human (who is also sinful) rather than God. We will never be good enough, perfect enough, or free from sin enough to earn salvation. It is a gift, so when we are always working to become perfect, we are under a curse, bondage, a yoke of slavery to earn perfection. Some people think that wearing long denim skirts, head coverings, hair up in buns makes them more righteous. Some people think by attending church every time the doors are open, they are more righteous. Some think that by suffering and giving up things that are important to them, they are more righteous. But, God’s Word tells us that living by faith in His Son, Jesus Christ makes us right with God.
Galatians 3:10, “All 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.” Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.”
Perfection isn’t going to happen on this side of heaven. When we stand before God He sees us as perfect, not because of what we’ve accomplished or given up, but because of who He is.
Galatians 5:1, “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.”
2 Corinthians 3:17, “Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.”
Some people believe this ‘freedom’ is a license to continue living in sin, but there are too many other scriptures that prove otherwise. I believe this referral to freedom means to be who God created us to be, freedom from fear of anyone who doesn’t go to our ‘church’, freedom to have the God-given talents, interests, and gifts He gave us when He created us, freedom from the guilt and punishment of sin, freedom to have relationships with our family and others, not just those in our ‘church’, freedom to go places without being guarded by someone in our ‘church’, freedom to study God’s Word with others who may belong to other congregations of believers, freedom to know that God loves us just as we are.
In your latest post, you make reference to ‘spirits’. One can be sure that if someone is throwing rocks at others, threatening, assaulting, lying, and making false accusations, intentionally causing fear of loved ones, fearing those who have always loved and cared for you, belittling others, hating others, intentionally causing division among loved ones by moving someone into your house and threatening his/her family, it is not ‘The Holy Spirit’. God is a God of creation, love, unity, peace, honor, patience, kindness, compassion, gentleness, grace, mercy, righteousness, forgiveness. When we see behaviors and actions that speak otherwise, we can know that it isn’t ‘the Holy Spirit’.
I dp put some definate stalk in what the leaders of my aunts church say......they been on the narrow way longer then me. What would they steer me in a wrong way for, what would that benefit them, I think it's ok to take stalk in what a pastor has to say (god does put shepards over the flock, to all steer them in the right way, not all them are good shepards, but I believe it is god's desire that we be in the sheepfold listening to a pastor and heeding what he has to say). Good to go to church and not forsake the congregating of each other (I'm aware of this new "emerging church that is online only") I don't know if your of this online only (or mostly) church but I know it exists. My aunts church they don't believe they'll be perfect til they get to heaven. Paul he didn't finish the course til later on in the bible appeared to take him awhile. I feel bad about talking bad about the smith's friends, have a continual hard time balancing loving them, or even knowing if I am loving them, or how far I am from that mark???????????? I don't feel it's safe for me to attend their church anymore. There is 1 their members I'm writing these days, cause was really super holy spirit lead to write this smith's friends sister.
I'm working hard to heed this verse lately as you can see it is a battle area for me to not speak evil of anybody Titus 3:2 "To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men."
My aunts church is working out good for me........I've inspired entire sermons......somebodies gotta keep me from doing the next stupid thing I crack in my skull.
Yep I'll never be a part of that online only group, I'm a full out sheep in the sheepfold bahing : )
Sophie said, """"Perfection isn’t going to happen on this side of heaven.""" If it ain't going to happen this side of heaven, then what was paul talking about when he said.......2 Timothy 4:6-8
6For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand.
7I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:
Aren't we called to be overcomers??????? Wouldn't a overcomer be perfect???????????? 1 John 5:4 "For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith." 1 John 3:9
"Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." Seems to be some sort of entire perfection to me????????? On like this side of heaven like easily! Not sinning and overcoming the world, what's more perfect then that????????? That's all supposed to all happen to us, like while on this earth!
Though paul it didn't happen for him, like this magical finishing the course til later on his in life.....might take us awhile, I have no illusions that it might take awhile, overcoming the world is a big task at hand.
2 Samuel 22:33 "God is my strength and power: and he maketh my way perfect." perfect.
Ephesians 4:13 "Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:" "unto a perfect man" perfect
Philippians 3:12 "Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus." to be perfect
Colossians 1:28 "Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:"
Hebrews 6:1 "Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God," One my favs ""let us go on unto perfection"
1 Peter 5:10 "But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you." seems to be to me we's plentily supposed to not only become perfect this side of heaven, push towards that end!
I had fun with this reply : ) I ain't perfect though naw, no way, not yet........but that's what we's supposed to seek to do be "let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God" perfect, perfect like christ was perfect 100% perfect and overcomeing the whole world
Giving it to God said:
“I dp put some definate stalk in what the leaders of my aunts church say......they been on the narrow way longer then me,” and “I think it's ok to take stalk in what a pastor has to say”
“What would they steer me in a wrong way for, what would that benefit them,”
There are many leaders/pastors that are trustworthy individuals and can be trusted because they humble themselves and place their faith in God through the saving grace of Jesus. Still, I believe we should be on guard and place our hope and trust in Jesus more than men. Jesus is THE Only One who will NEVER disappoint. He is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. According to Scripture, He is the Only begotten Son of God, born perfect, never sinned, died on the cross for the sins we’ve committed, was buried and rose again, sits at the right hand of God, is a mediator for sinners and the only way to be reconciled to God.
Unfortunately people who followed leaders like Jim Jones, David Koresh, Warren Jeffs, Marshall Applewhite, Sun Myung Moon, and others like them, probably all believed they could ‘put stock in’ what their leader/pastor had to say, too, but they were deceived. Just because someone seems to have been ‘on the narrow way’ longer than we are or ‘claims’ to have revelations doesn’t necessarily mean that they are trustworthy, above reproach, honorable, a person of integrity, or someone we should ‘put stock in’. It doesn’t mean they aren’t capable of giving in to satan’s schemes and twisting the truth, manipulating, coercing, lying, in order to take advantage of others. As long as we live in the flesh, each of us has the capability of caving in to the temptations sin. Leaders/pastors are only human so this applies to them, too. We know of self-serving people throughout history, who have lead others away from Jesus, away from God, and away from their own family, friends and even their own self-identity in order to use them for personal gain, including financial, sexual, and other favors.
There is nothing wrong with listening to and believing what pastors say as long as it lines up with Scripture. There are some who have used their title of pastor/preacher/leader and twisted scripture, added their own interpretation to it, taken it out of context and/or proof-texted certain passages in order to gain something or achieve a goal for him/herself or his/her organization. Luke 14:26, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters-yes, even his own life-he cannot be my disciple,” is a favorite of unscrupulous religious groups. Anytime someone intentionally attempts to separate a person from his/her God-given family using this verse with heavy emphasis and out of context (and/or any other means) the integrity of that group or person should be scrutinized. This verse is a favorite of cultic religious groups. Why do these types of groups desire to separate loved ones and how would that be beneficial to them? So they will have heavy influence over that person’s interests, activities, goals, plans, beliefs, time, finances, and more which can greatly benefit the ‘church’. The ‘church’s’ interests, activities, people, beliefs, become your interests, activities, people, and beliefs to the point of excluding anyone not in your group. Where a person’s interests are, there so shall be his/her time and finances.
Couple this with 2 Corinthians 5:17, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!” In The Bride and the Harlot, a leader of SF, Sigurd Bratlie interprets this passage to mean, “A perfect apprentice is one who gives up all his own opinions and plans and is obedient to his master.” And, “We realize that to be born again means to receive a new life with entirely new interests.”
Many ‘cultic’ type groups use Luke 14:26 (twisted and out of context) in order to separate, divide, and cause hatred of one’s own family. Then by teaching this twisted interpretation of 2 Corinthians, SF members are also taught to ‘give up all his/her own opinions and plans and be obedient to his/her master’ and ‘receive a new life with entirely new interests’. This ‘new life with ENTIRELY new interests’ would be a life without one’s ‘OWN opinions and plans’. So now a new member has cut ties with his/her own family, given up his/her own opinions, his/her own plans, and his/her own interests and will receive a NEW life with ENTIRELY NEW interests, NEW opinions, NEW plans. Can you think of a better way to take advantage of someone than to suppress who God created this individual to be and recreate them in ‘the leaders’ image with the interests/plans/opinions of the leader or group? So whose new interests would these be? How could a leader/pastor/preacher benefit from this?
Doesn’t Smiths’ Friends own a company called DWN Service in which members of the ‘church’ are contracted out to work but rather than the individuals who render services getting paid, Brunstad receives the commission? Is this ‘church’ using member-earned money to build Brunstad or to teach people about a Savior named Jesus Christ whose blood was shed in order to reconcile repentant sinners to God? So, who benefits from this?
“(god does put shepards over the flock, to all steer them in the right way, not all them are good shepards, but I believe it is god's desire that we be in the sheepfold listening to a pastor and heeding what he has to say).”
Although many are good shepherds, I agree that not all pastors are good shepherds. That’s why I believe we need to remember that all men are fallible, and when they teach something, to check what they say and see how it lines up with scripture (in context and with proper knowledge of the original language). I also believe it is wise to not get all of our teaching from only one ‘church’ or leaders of that ‘church’. When we only receive teaching/Bible studies/instruction from one source (one ‘church’), then we can be setting ourselves up for what that particular ‘church’ wants us to believe, think, know, and how they want us to behave.
In John 10:11 Jesus tells us, “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.”
And in John 10:14, He again calls Himself the Good Shepherd, “I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know Me-just as the Father knows Me and I know the Father –and I lay down My life for the sheep.”
Acts 5:29, “Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than men!”
Concerning perfection:
“2 Samuel 22:33, "God is my strength and power: and he maketh my way perfect." perfect.”
In this passage, David is praising God. His words say, ‘It is God who arms me with strength and makes MY WAY perfect.’ He doesn’t say that God makes him perfect or that he became perfect – he said God makes MY WAY perfect. That is not the same as a person becoming perfect here on this earth. We may mess things up but God, in His Wisdom, sometimes uses those things to fulfill His purpose in a way unknown to us. That doesn’t mean that we are perfect.
“Ephesians 4:13, "Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:" "unto a perfect man" perfect”
NIV reads: ‘until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become MATURE, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.’
”Philippians 3:12, "Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus." to be perfect”
NIV: “Not that I’ve already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it.”
“Paul he didn't finish the course til later on in the bible appeared to take him awhile.”
Is ‘Fighting the good fight, finishing the course, keeping the faith’ really the same as being or becoming perfect? Or does it means to repent of our sins, continue to ‘fight’ the temptations that can cause us to sin, continue drawing closer to Jesus and keep and grow in the faith of Christ Jesus as our redeemer, propitiation, and mediator to God. We were born with a sin nature. Everyone EXCEPT Jesus had two human/mortal parents. When Adam and Eve chose to believe satan’s lie instead of believing, trusting, and obeying God, sin was ushered into the world and it has been here ever since. The Bible tells us that Jesus is the only one who has never sinned. We may strive toward perfection, fight the good fight to keep living out our faith, and become more Christ-like. Because of prior committed sin in our life, it is impossible to now be considered perfect (without fault, flaw, defect) while still living in our body. We may stop sinning and doing things that are detestable to God, but without repentance for sins we’ve committed, working to become perfect on our own is worthless and without result. If we are truly repentant, when God looks at us, He doesn’t see our sin, what He sees is what Jesus did for us. Jesus is our defense attorney. He is the reason God doesn’t see our sin and hold it against us. He washed away our sin, because of our repentant hearts and acceptance of His One and Only Perfect Son, Jesus Christ.
Isaiah 53:12, “…For He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”
1 Peter 2:24, “and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness for by His wounds you were healed.”
1 Corinthians 15:3, “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,”
1 Jn. 2:1-2, “My little children, I am writing these things to you that you may not sin, and if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous; and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.”
Propitiation – to appease and make favorable, atonement, something that appeases and conciliates a diety
Atonement - to bring from a state of enmity or opposition to a state of friendliness, toleration, reconciliation, restoration
Paul says in this passage that HE HAS NOT OBTAINED THIS; he DOES NOT SAY that he has already been made perfect while residing in the bodily form on the earth. He says, ‘I press on to take hold of THAT for which CHRIST JESUS took hold of me’. For what was it that Jesus ‘took hold of him’? Was it so he would attain perfection here on the earth? Was it so he too, even though he was a sinner, could be forgiven for his sins through the sacrifice of Christ and then go on to teach others about Jesus? Paul was an imperfect person who persecuted and even killed believers and followers of Jesus Christ, but God changed his heart, which in turn changed his behavior for the better. He repented, began living for God by demonstrating love for others, teaching and leading others to Jesus-not to himself-but to Christ. He demonstrates how God loves and forgives people, even those who we may not think are worthy.
“Colossians 1:28, "Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:"
NIV: “We proclaim Him, admonishing and teaching everyone with all wisdom, so that we may present everyone perfect in Christ.”
This verse is not saying that everyone became perfect here on this earth, but that they (Paul and Timothy) are preaching/proclaiming the message of Who Jesus is and what He did so that each person may be presented as perfect IN CHRIST.
“Hebrews 6:1, "Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God," One my favs ""let us go on unto perfection"
NIV: “Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to MATURITY, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God,”
“1 Peter 5:10 "But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you."
NIV: “And the God of all grace, who called you to His eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will Himself ‘restore’ you and make you strong, firm and steadfast.”
This is a good example of why it is very important to examine the original text (Greek, Hebrew), context, word usage, language. In order for us to comprehend and understand the original intent and meaning, we need to know some of these things. As with most words, the word ‘perfect’ has more than one meaning. One definition means ‘entirely without flaw, fault, or defect’. But, it can also mean ‘mature or complete’. I do believe people can become ‘mature’. But I believe it to be impossible for human beings to become ‘perfect’ using the definition of ‘faultless, flawless, or without defect’.
In Matthew 18:3, Jesus says, “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.”
In this verse, what does Jesus say to do? He says we should humble ourselves-admit our human limitations, admit that we have sinned, admit that we’re sorry for our sins, admit it when we wrong and hurt God and others, admit that we need a Savior.
Humility-Having a low opinion of one’s own importance or merit; modest or meek in spirit, not proud or haughty, absence of vanity or pride.
James 3:2, “We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check.”
James 3:7, “All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles, and creatures of the sea are being tamed and have been tamed by man, but no man can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.”
If ‘no man can tame the tongue’ then we are all at fault and stumble. If we are at fault and stumble in what we sometimes say, then can we be considered ‘perfect’ by God’s standards?
you got a point sophie : ) man I'm not 100% the apostolic christian church of america isn't a cult, I'm really scratching my head these days. You know a person can't take communion at their church less you are a member, and they clean don't have sunday school in the summer which ain't workin for me I have 2 kids and very much want them in sunday school this summer.......goofy to me not having sunday school. Most churches have vbs add to in addition to sunday school! (I blogged about my frustrations with the apostolic christian church of america these days, my latest blog and the blog before it) my family just going to living hope tonight my mainstream christian church, looks to be that's church for us this weekend. Smith's friends did that to, like had sundays off in the summer - it was goofy to me, and their kids all year long just had sunday school every other week or sometimes only once a month. I think, I think I really am a tbn watching, and daystar : ) mainstream christian. I'm not cutting the apostolic christian church of america mustard, they more holy then me! They win!
Well, I dont really know what to think about that church anymore cause I do know that their is lots of great people in that church that I respect. One thing tho, I have heard lots of testimony how much they are againts sin, but I notice if someone in the church is living in sin, as long no one knows about it, only a few people it will past. Reason I am saying that its the way someone I know is living, that person had taken a women lawyer who she is a lesbian and is living with another women plus she is fighting for the rights of gays and lesbian for adoption for kids.The leader of that church knows about it but I guess what can he do. Anyway, that church will be the first one to acuse other church of the way people live , but they wont look into their own church. I thought it was the a special church but I was wrong on that one.
GITG: Your comments are interesting to me. I believe they underscore some very useful topics for discussion. First is your disillusionment with the Apostolic Christian Church of America. I know that there are many mainstream Christian churches that practice closed communion. They are not the only one.
I happen to believe, and the church I attend does also, in open communion. As long as you believe, and have been baptized, in the name of Jesus Christ, then you are free to participate with us in communion. We don’t check your credentials, or ask for any proof, or public statements. That is between you and the Lord. We offer it and you are free to participate. If you wish to be baptized we will do that too.
I would like to add that, in my opinion, this subject, by itself, in no way identifies the Apostolic Christian Church of America as a cult or not. I would like to ask though, what the practices are at the Smith’s Friends fellowship in Salem. Do they baptize people? If they do, is that done in the name of Jesus Christ, or is this a baptism into their church. In other words, would they accept my baptism in another protestant evangelical Christian church as a valid baptism and allow me to participate in their communion services?
As a follow on question, do they even offer communion and, if so, is it open or closed?
GITG: I am also interested in your experience with Sunday School schedules. If you are trying to reach other people and want those people to find and attend your services, then it is normal to offer those services at regular and published times. I can understand, if there aren’t very many children in the church and most of them are gone for the summer then there may be a reason to not have Sunday School during the summer months. However, I believe this can also be a tactic to avoid scrutiny and maintain isolation.
For instance, this local SF fellowship, and all the others that I can find do not use the name Brunstad Christian Church. They avoid being associated with a large worldwide organized church. This is understandable since their doctrine is so antagonistic toward organized religions. But this is an egregious deception. This local fellowship, for instance, uses the name Owasso Christian Fellowship. However they are not registered with the state as a non-profit organization. The only web site that identifies them as a local congregation does not give an address or any other information besides a phone number which happens to be the personal phone number for this school teacher turned church leader.
So why hide information like that? If you truly believe what you preach then why not get out there and preach it in a public forum? I think we all know the answer.
GITG, you also mention how the Sunday School schedule in your SF fellowship seems to be random. This can also be a manipulative tactic used by cults to control their membership. If the leader gets to decide when and where they meet and there are no published schedules then, if a member makes plans to meet with someone outside the group and the leader wants to disrupt it, all he needs to do is call a meeting for that time. This puts the member in the position of having to cancel other plans. This also tests his loyalty to the leader. The leader can use this to determine who is “committed” and who is not.
By the way, “committed” is also a common code word inside cults to label those who are loyal to the church and the leaders. Most of us, when we hear that word, think that is a reference to a “committed Christian” as in committed to Jesus Christ. This is what is referred to as “loading the language”. In this way cults often define their own meanings to common words which can be very disorienting to outsiders because we may use the same words but the context is different.
GITG, you may not cut the mustard for the Apostolic Church but that doesn’t mean that you don’t cut the mustard for Jesus Christ. You may need to find the right church that suits you. And that may not be easy in your location but at the end of the day it is what you believe about Jesus Christ that saves you and not which church you attend.
Just Me: I am sure there are lots of good people in the SF church. I have tried to make this point several times. I don’t believe that the average SF member out there is a bad or evil person. I’m sure there are many SF members trying very hard to be good Christians just as I believe that there were lots of people in Jonestown as well who were trying very hard to be good people. The deception with groups like SF (aka Owasso Christian Fellowship) is that they believe and teach that THEY are the only ones going to heaven, THEY are more serious Christians, THEY are better Christians, and THEY are superior to others in their belief and spirituality and must be exclusive in order to remain that way.
It has been well documented on this blog that the SF leadership uses verses like Luke 14:26 out of context and twisted in order to emotionally and physically sever family relationships and they use words like harlot to describe “the organized religious world” or in other words, everyone outside of their church. The truth is that they are more “organized” than a lot of other churches that they refer to as harlots.
By using these types of labels to describe those outside their group, this leads to feelings of superiority, hatred, and division. Add that to Luke 14:26 (out of context and twisted) and one can see how they can cause hatred and division rather than unity and love among Christians.
It’s been stated on here many times and in the Bible that ALL people are sinners and every church is full of sinners because there are no perfect people. There are many people who love the Lord, many who make choices that glorify God, but they are still not perfect. But, the deception that SF teaches is that they can become perfect in the same manner as Jesus the Christ.
I was recently reading an article written by Marvin Olasky entitled “Islam vs. Liberty: Is a rule-obsessed religion that denies original sin and the need for grace compatible with freedom?” In this article Mr. Olasky talks about a class he once taught on comparative religions where he says:
“Most students identified Christianity with a set of moralistic rules: Obey them and you’re good.”
“Oddly enough, what they saw as Christianity is more like Islam. Muslims do not recognize original sin. They contend that Allah, through his prophet Muhammad, laid out the rules for moral living, and that we are naturally capable of following all of them.”
He quotes a popular muslim website that states: “A believer… has the conviction that there is no other means of success and salvation for him except purity of soul and righteousness of behavior.”
“Christians say only Christ meets that standard. (This is why ‘substitutionary atonement’ is a crucial doctrine.) Muslims say they can meet it.”
“Islam’s non-recognition of original sin, and consequent assumption that we can be sinless, leads Mubasher Ahmad of the Islamic Research Foundation International to conclude that it’s possible ‘to eliminate suffering caused by humans.’ Muslims believe Allah has set out rules that can lead to a just society: Shariah law.”
“Christians don’t think a set of rules will make things right…Apart from God’s grace, we go our own way.”
As I read these statements about Muslims I have to reflect on Sigurd Bratlie and Brunstad Christian Church who says “Now I can become perfect according to my conscience. My conscience is my understanding of good and evil. To be perfect is to put everything in my life in order according to the understanding I have. Then I no longer have these continual reminders of sins.”
And: “When we speak about being perfect, we mean perfect according to our conscience as disciples – and this is possible.”
So in this context, is there much difference between Islam and DKM?
Harold,
I've been quiet for a while. Didn't seem like much more was worth saying. Your post coincided with an email exchange I just had with a friend that covers your a coupld of your questions.
Specifically, you raise two interesting questions:
1. What does it mean to "partake of divine nature" as Peter wrote in 1 Pet. 1:4. This is a favorite SF verse supporting their notion of becoming "perfect according to my conscience."
2. Is Christianity rule-based or something else?
#2 first. Paul wrote clearly in several places that righteousness is of faith and not according to the law. In basing perfection on conscience, Bratlie situates it squarely within the jurisdiction of law.
Conscience is relevant only in reference to wrongdoing or lack of well-doing. There is no law against the fruits of the Spirit because laws serve a single purpose: when we are headed the wrong way, they stop us. If we are headed the right way, laws are in our rear-views. AT MOST, laws can serve as sign posts along the way, but then we treat them as indicators, not laws. In practice, walking in the spirit starts with what we WANT and is guided by what we LOVE. Laws have as little to do with it as they do with expressing genuine love and care for those closest to us.
Like many either-or controversies, both sides throw some baby out with the bathwater. SF stresses holiness. Others stress grace and forgiveness. In the past SF's holiness emphasis was more sincere than it is now, given the group's current fetish with materialistic pursuits. SF was not the first sect to stress holiness. They teach (and some even believed) that we can literally become like Jesus in this life. How that's a bad thing escapes me. Their problem is they don't go about it by faith.
Mainstream Christianity seems to have despaired of holiness. Grace and forgiveness and the blood of Jesus "covers" the pitiful state of the lives of most Christians. I've been asking Christians I know whether they experience rivers of living water flowing from their innermost beings. No one has yet said "Yes." Then I ask them if they personally know ANYONE that they think is experiencing rivers of living water flowing from their innermost being. NO ONE HAS ANSWERED THAT THEY KNOW A SINGLE CHRISTIAN WHO EXPERIENCES THIS.
If we were experiencing the kind of life that Jesus promised to everyone who believes, we wouldn't be making excuses for our pitifully poor lives, pretending that we are rich and full and have need of nothing. We wouldn't rejoice that grace and forgiveness and Jesus' blood make up for our lack of holiness. We'd be too busy thinking about God's power in our lives and how to best express it.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
So to #1, what does it mean to partake of divine nature? What is holiness? Is "perfection" possible?
The following is lengthy and answers those questions from an angle most Christians I know aren't used to. I'm interested in seeing the reaction it all gets.
Paul answered the questions about holiness, perfection, and divine nature by redefining them first. More accurately, our conception of things like holiness, perfection, and divine nature have been corrupted by millennia of church teaching. Paul wasn't thus corrupted, so it isn't fair to say that he redefined the questions. WE need to redefine them in order to understand the answers Paul gave them.
The redefinition: judge according to the spirit and not according to the flesh. Put differently: judge according to the truth and not according to appearances. Perfection, holiness, and divine nature ACCORDING TO THE FLESH are what the Pharisees practiced, and Jesus blasted them for it. They did so to get a reputation with others. They fooled practically everyone, except I'd bet that they didn't fool those who knew them well personally.
If we agree with Jesus that hypocritical perfection, holiness, and divine nature are hogwash, that alone doesn't mean we know what REAL perfection, holiness, and divine nature are. If we rule out the very notions as hypocritical by definition, as most non-holiness Christians do, we prove that we don't have a clue about what the real things are.
To get into this, I'll answer a third question, which was the topic of my email exchange with my friend: Did Jesus make mistakes?
John says in 1 John 2:22 that the Antichrist denies that Jesus is the Christ, but he says TWICE that the Antichrist denies that Jesus came "in the flesh." 1 John 4:2-3 and 2 John 1:7. This isn't about whether or not Jesus had a physical body.
SF teaches that Jesus came in a flesh like we have and cite Rom. 8:3, that he came "in the likeness of SINFUL flesh." Any mention of sin in Jesus' flesh makes most Christians uncomfortable. SF points out that Jesus not only came in the likeness of sinful flesh, but that he "condemned sin in the flesh" as per the same verse. How did he do that if there was no sin in his flesh to condemn?
We could take it that Jesus' death and resurrection after a sinless life were sin's condemnation. That's a fairly uninvolved condemnation, like a judicial condemnation. It ignores another favorite SF point, that Jesus was tempted in all things as we are. Heb. 4:15. In order to regard Jesus as holy, perfect, and divine, most Christians internally rephrase that verse to read that he was tempted in all things in a different way than we are. Being tempted like we get tempted implies things we don't like being applied to Jesus. SF teaches that Jesus was not only tempted, but that the possibility that he could have sinned was real.
The problem with SF on this issue is that they don't go far enough.
Jesus was just as human as we are. Just as cognitively limited and error-prone. He had to learn to talk, learn to walk, learn trade skills, etc. Of course he made mistakes! If he'd been remarkable growing up, he would have gotten attention. The gospels give me the impression that his mother was the only one who knew that he was special until after he started his "ministry."
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
The motivation behind separating Jesus in kind from the rest of humanity is flawed. People want to recognize his "divinity" but do it by alienating him from themselves in the process. The Catholics and their cult of saints are prime examples. They need Mary and other saints because they can't relate to Jesus. This alienation is based on some assumptions that contradict Jesus' and the Apostle's teachings.
One assumption is that evil is contagious, i.e., that mere proximity to evil increases the risk of being infected by it. True enough for leprosy; and yet when the disease is understood, proximity is manageable. The contagion assumption contradicts everything that Jesus stood for. It was the basis for the religious authorities' criticism of his choice of company.
The contagion assumption accepts that contact with evil will likely result in infection by evil. A little critical thought would show that this isn't true, but even rational acceptance of the truth doesn't eliminate the motivational power of the assumption. Just watch how people react in various situations when faced with someone they consider "cursed" in some way. Even people who were once admired and attractive can get distanced, abandoned, even ostracized when they encounter serious misfortune. No one wants it to rub off on them.
The contagion assumption is a recognition of the Great Power of Evil, which contradicts everything Jesus stood for and taught. Other assumptions recognize the Great Power of Evil. Recognition of the Great Power of Evil is why we resist evil people instead of overcome them, and why we get anxious in the prospect of evil, just to name a couple of examples. Evil is easily overcome by good. It's only difficult to overcome while we remain deceived about it and submit to it in recognition of its presumed power.
Given the contagion assumption, we can't reconcile the notion that Jesus "came in the likeness of sinful flesh" with the idea that he was holy and did not sin. But the assumption is wrong; there is nothing to reconcile.
We like to think that Jesus was essentially different than us for another reason: to avoid the implication that we can (and should) essentially be like him, or even that we ARE like him. John wrote "as He is, so also ARE we in this world." 1 John 4:17. He wrote this about perfection in love.
I agree with SF that Jesus had a sinful flesh just like ours and was tempted just like we are by the same sin in that flesh. I just read Aslaksen's "Satan Crushed Under Your Feet" and was surprised at how much I still like it.
I think there was a huge difference between the thinking of J. O. Smith and Aslaksen on one hand and Sigurd Bratlie on the other. Bratlie was an uneducated pedant. His joy seemed to lie in creating doctrines. Neither Smith nor Aslaksen were doctrinaires. They were interested in empowering people. If a "Law of the Spirit of Life" helped, good. If not, they tried something else. They were committed to the truth as they understood it, not to their expressions or descriptions of the truth, i.e., doctrines. Bratlie elevated doctrine over people. I think that Aslaksen would have seen Kaare Smith coming a mile away. Bratlie was blind.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
The whole point of Jesus becoming human was to partake of our nature (Heb 2:14) so that we could partake of divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). Diminish one and we diminish the other. Sure, Jesus came to save us from damnation, but consider how simplistically Christians understand salvation. Heaven and hell are places, and being saved means going to heaven instead of hell. Do X, Y, and Z and you go to one rather than the other. What do X, Y, and Z have to do with the reasons why you should go to one rather than the other? Most answers to that question boil down to "Because the Bible says so." That's a serious lack of understanding.
The common Christian notion that suddenly everything changes after this life and we become completely different creatures is nonsense. John wrote that we will be like Him because we'll see Him as He is with respect to the transformation of our BODIES, not our minds. 1 John 3:2-3 John says that EVERYONE who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, JUST AS HE IS PURE. What's to purify when everything magically changes on the last day?
Paul doesn't just say that we should have the mind of Christ, but that WE DO. 1 Cor. 2:16 Most Christians I've known and read have no experiential understanding of that. Paul also wrote extensively about the TRANSFORMATION of our minds. Our minds change now; that's our task in this life. Our bodies get transformed once we leave this life. Phil. 3:21 The minds we enter heaven with will be the same minds we leave Earth with.
"Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives." Heb. 2:14-15
So partaking of flesh and blood involved death, not just physical death, but alienation from God.
"Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people." Heb. 2:17
The writer of Hebrews stressed Jesus' likeness to us so strongly, he felt obligated to add, "yet without sin" as if to make sure he didn't go too far and mislead us. Heb. 4:15 In other words, being made like his brethren in all things meant ALL THINGS, not just most or some things or "kind of like."
I don't think it's going too far to say that Jesus shared the same experiences that Paul writes about in Romans 7. If Jesus' flesh was like our flesh, there was nothing good in it, either; the willingness was present in him, but the doing of the good was not. He practiced the very evil that he did not wish, but it was not him doing it, but the sin which dwelled in him.
Most Christians will regard that last paragraph as blasphemy. Here's the problem with their view: if Jesus never did anything wrong, he was not made like his brethren in all things when it comes to what Paul writes about in Romans 7. So, maybe that's not so bad; maybe he was made like us in every other way. The problem with that notion is that Paul writes about the very core, the very essence of temptation in Romans 7. If Jesus wasn't tempted in that way, he wasn't tempted AT ALL like we are. The trick is that we misunderstand what temptation is about.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
Paul admitted practicing "the very evil that I do not want" but he did not consider himself a sinner. He divorced himself from everything he found in himself that waged war against the law of his mind.
"For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members." Rom. 7:22-23
If Jesus cannot sympathize with THOSE weaknesses, then he was not tempted in ALL things as we are. Paul alienated himself from his "body of sin" (Rom. 6:6) as if it and he were two separate things. Spiritually, which means in terms of what he TRULY wanted, he and it actually were two separate things at war with each other. What's more, he didn't claim that he could conquer "the body of this death."
The upshot of the whole passage is, "Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin." Rom. 7:25 He expected this state of affairs to continue until Jesus "shall transform our body of humiliation into conformity to his body of glory." Phil. 3:21
Christians take this as proof that Paul and we must continue to "sin" until we are transformed. At the same time, they show no understanding of the radical separation Paul made between himself, who served the law of God in the inner man, and his flesh, which served the law of sin. Without that radical separation of, "I am no longer the one doing it," there is no way to honestly avoid condemnation.
Honest Christians experience condemnation when they realize they've done something evil. They respond to having done evil (however they define it) by claiming grace and forgiveness over themselves, the sinners. Their "fight of faith" often consists of trying to believe that God is good enough to give them grace and forgive them in spite of what they did and in spite of the high probability that they will do it again. If they succeed in believing that, their fight of faith becomes to try not to do it again, at least if they are sincere. Even the atheistic world sees the hypocrisy in this.
Paul did not count himself a sinner. He was no longer the one doing it. Paul was not the same man he was before he was born again. Most Christians I've met act as if they are just as much the sinners that they were before they were born again. The only differences are that now they "get grace," they are forgiven, and God's power is available to help them do better in the future. They don't divorce themselves from the sin that dwells in them. Instead, they own it: they identify it as theirs and accept responsibility for it. Paul didn't do this.
The temptation involved in the struggle Paul writes about in Rom. 7--the temptation to believe appearances rather than the truth--seems to me to be the real basis of ALL temptation. This idea is actually the thesis of Aslaksen's "Satan Crushed Under Your Feet." The only reason we choose evil rather than good is that we believe lies about evil. Those lies come from appearances that make evil seem like something that it is not, something attractive or even good. This deception underlies all temptation. Otherwise, if we truly see evil for what it is and desire it, we truly are evil.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
"For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good."
Paul's temptation was about identity. Where did "the very thing I hate" and "the very evil that I do not want" come from? Who was responsible? Law (any law) and judgment by appearances can find only one culprit in answer to those questions: Paul. Paul came up with a different answer.
He explained that we "were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ" in Rom. 7:4. "But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter." The evil Paul hated AND PRACTICED was NOT his responsibility. It did not come from him even though it came from his body. He disowned evil along with its source. "But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me." Rom. 7:20 For Paul, the deciding factor was NOT what he did, but what he WANTED. I believe this is the essential difference between living under the law, which can go no deeper than manifested deeds, and living according to the Spirit, to whom the thoughts and intentions of the heart are laid bare.
Paul's temptation was a choice between letting physical evidence (the evil he practiced) or the truth (that he loved God's law and hated evil) define who he was. It was a matter of establishing his existence as a being, of identifying himself as one being rather than another. The important thing isn't just which being he chose. The most important thing was how he decided to make the choice.
Paul chose righteousness and loved the law of God instead of the "different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members." But more importantly, he decided to make the choice between good and evil SPIRITUALLY instead of according to the flesh. He chose to establish his existence in terms of what he truly wanted instead of what he managed to demonstrate. God seeks those who worship in spirit and truth; religions are full of ways to worship according to the flesh, in appearance rather than truth. Paul chose to dismiss appearances. This seems to be the only way to deal with sin that doesn't involve hypocrisy, and it seems to be involved in all temptation.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
If Jesus was not tempted by way of "not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate," he really was not tempted in all ways like we are. If the choice between establishing ourselves in the spirit rather than the flesh is involved in all temptation, then Jesus wasn't tempted in ANY way like we are unless he was tempted the same way that Paul describes in Rom. 7.
Looking at things this way highlights the incredible superficiality of our typical notion of sin. For most people, sin consists of things you should not do, things that people do because they have somehow internalized evil. The reasons why you should not "sin" can be clear (murder) or unclear (masturbation), and "sin" is constituted differently from one moralistic view to another. How we internalized evil and what that evil actually consists of are even more mysterious.
Sin is a concept that isn't common across all religions, but all religions deal with some version of the issue that something is wrong with us that needs to be corrected. Several common things seem to run through all religions with regard to that issue. First, wrong doing comes from wrong thinking. Second, wrong thinking is intrinsic to being human. Third, it takes a lot of pain--hard work, struggle, suffering, rigorous regimens, etc.--to correct our wrong thinking.
The most interesting common belief about our wrongness is that behavior--what we do--is the most important thing. Even recognizing that internal things like thinking, emotions, desires, drives, etc., produce behavior doesn't make them more important to moralists, although psychologists would disagree. Of course, moralists can't address internal matters with rules or laws. I think that they redefine the problem to suit their tools.
Besides, Jesus and Paul contradicted the belief that behavior is primary big time. What we do is important as an EXPRESSION of the inward truth. Manipulating behavior to make it appear that the truth is a certain way while leaving the internal truth untouched is hypocrisy, not holiness.
Because of a hypocritical overemphasis on behavior, law is a common element of most religions. Laws, rules, doctrines, principles, theories, etc., are common outside of religion, too. Law is expressed in various ways, but it serves the same function and operates the same way regardless. Law can only deal with behavior AFTER behavior has occurred. Before that, in anticipation of how we choose to act, it's a poor substitute for the spirit, for loving God's law truly, inwardly.
Doing something because we WANT to is authentic. Doing something because we are SUPPOSED to is patently hypocritical. We wouldn't need "should" if we already had "want," so relying on "should" is tacit admission that we DON'T want to do what we should, or at least that we don't believe that we want to. This is why, I believe, Paul called it the "righteousness of faith." It all comes down to what we truly believe at our cores, the inner motivations that produce our behavior: the spirit. Paul spent a lot of writing on the difference between that and living "under law."
Haha, I suppose that's enough for now. This is such a rich topic; I never get tired of it. It's powerful. What I learned as I tried to DO what Paul wrote about in Romans 7, (as opposed to struggling to first reconcile it to what I thought I "knew",) has opened up lots of other scriptures; but most importantly, it's opened up a way to experience the power that the scriptures talk about. I'm just getting started, sad to say, but better late than never!
I look forward to everyone's reactions to this. :)
Just Me: “Well, I dont really know what to think about that church anymore cause I do know that their is lots of great people in that church that I respect. “
Romans 3:23 says, “For ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” EVERY church is made up of sinners. Some sins just aren’t so outwardly obvious, but there isn’t a human alive who is completely without sin. We may be able to hide some of our sins from others, but we can’t hide any of them from God. God is Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Omnipresent. Just as with Adam and Eve, He sees everything we do, hears everything we say, and knows every thought we have. They were deceived by satan and then tried to hide from God, but He already knew they had disobeyed Him. From that time on, sin has been in the world. Every human being ever born is a sinner. There probably are many churches that have ‘lots of great people’ in them, but no matter how wonderful they are, they’re still sinners.
SF is no different; since it is made up of people, it is comprised of sinners just like every other church congregation on the face of this earth. Just as hospitals are made up of people who are unhealthy and in need of medical care, churches are made up of people who are sinners in need of a Savior.
Mark 2:17, “On hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous , but sinners.”
One big difference is that SF claims that they are more righteous, more holy, more serious Christians, than those who aren’t part of them, that they are ‘The’ chosen bride of Christ. They call those who aren’t part of their group a ‘harlot’ among other things. ‘Mainstream Christians’ admit they are sinners in need of a Savior. It doesn’t mean they go around sinning just because they can be forgiven.
When we teach that we can become perfect because Jesus did, doesn’t that reduce Jesus down to ‘just a man’ rather than someone who is capable of saving us from the condemnation that we so deserve because of our sins? If so, how did He have the ability, the right, or the power to tell the thief on the cross that he would be with Him that day in paradise? A mere human doesn’t have that ability.
“Anyway, that church will be the first one to acuse other church of the way people live , but they wont look into their own church. I thought it was the a special church but I was wrong on that one.”
All churches are made up of sinners, but when the leader and his family of a church is living in such outward, blatant, obvious sins such as intentionally severing physical and emotional ties of family and friends by moving a young college student out of her dorm (where her family had just helped her move into and was lead to believe that’s where she would be residing for the school term) and into his house, then lying about it, attempting to hide it, threatening, using intimidation, and fear tactics of anyone outside their own ‘church’, calling those not part of their ‘church’ harlots, and all the while boasting to be more righteous, more serious, more holy, and against sin, it does nothing for the witness of God, Jesus Christ, or even their own ‘church’. That’s the part that truly demonstrates what this group really is.
People who really are ‘more serious’ about their Christian faith and relationship with God aren’t afraid to humble themselves, and admit they aren’t perfect. They don’t continue talking about how righteous, holy, and serious they or the group they belong to are as they continue to commit sins. God already knows our sins, so we might as well be transparent enough to admit them and lay them before Him instead of trying to put on a façade for other people. Why not just admit that we are imperfect and need forgiveness?
"EVERY church is made up of sinners. Some sins just aren’t so outwardly obvious, but there isn’t a human alive who is completely without sin."
Of course. Who questions the fact of sin and sinners? Why worry about hypocrites who hide their sin, like many in SF? The question is whether anything can be DONE about sin.
The thrust of the evangelical message is forgiveness of sins. That just gets you in the door. Evangelicals lack understanding about how to deal with sin. They have an answer for the theological notion of sin, but not the experiential reality. Help with the experiential reality of sin has come from non-Christian sectors, especially psychology. It didn't come from churches or seminaries. Christians then take that information and rebrand it as if it's "Biblical."
Claiming that Christians must continue in sin and rely on grace and forgiveness is clearly unbiblical. Read the epistles. We are called to become like Jesus. As HE IS (not was) SO ALSO ARE WE IN THIS WORLD. 1 John 4:17 Not "should be" or "can be." John was clearly experiencing something that I have RARELY seen lived by any Christian. I have NEVER seen Christians who had that as their NORMAL MODE of experience. Why shouldn't it be normal? Don't we WANT it to be normal? Judging by how doggedly Christians argue against the possibility, I'd have to conclude that they DO NOT WANT TO EXPERIENCE WHAT JOHN WROTE ABOUT. We don't claim something is impossible when we hope to experience it. Hope brings faith, not objections.
"When we teach that we can become perfect because Jesus did, doesn’t that reduce Jesus down to ‘just a man’ rather than someone who is capable of saving us from the condemnation that we so deserve because of our sins?"
No.
Of course, there are ways to construe the notion of holiness and Jesus' nature so that he is reduced to "just a man." There are other ways that avoid that pitfall and don't deny that we can be "perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect" or make us feel a need to explain it away. I encourage you to look into them and understand them before you deny them.
Besides, the real question isn't whether or not any of us can arrive at some ideal state called "perfection." The real question is: Can we make ANY progress towards it? In other words, CAN WE GET BETTER? If not, we're stuck and it's not worth the effort to try. If we CAN get better, then ANY progress is better than none, and we should stop making excuses for not trying.
Most arguments against holiness focus on the impossibility of perfect end states while they ignore the question of progress in that direction. That means ignoring much of the Apostle's writings. How can this be a race or a fight or a struggle if everything needed was magically done for us on the cross? The "struggle" for many Christians is to believe THAT IT REALLY WAS done on the cross while their daily life experience flies in the face of that belief.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
After listening to anti-holiness arguments for about four decades now, they strike me not as arguments about the way things are or what the Bible teaches, but as excuses for remaining stuck and not trying to change.
Most Christian inspirational material (written and preached) tries to give us reason to believe or to evoke faith in us emotionally. It's like a preacher telling a kid sitting on a bicycle, "You can ride! You can really ride!" So the kid says, "Cool! How?" The preacher stops, thinks, and then says, "Because you really can!" Then, if the poor kid persists in asking how, the preacher tells him that he lacks faith and just needs to believe.
If the preacher actually KNEW something about bike-riding, he'd tell him to put his feet on the pedals, how to pump them, how to use the handle-bars, how to lean into a turn, how to stay balanced, etc. And then he would do something few preachers ever do, because they are too busy telling us to believe or what to believe: he'd shut up, hold the seat, and run alongside the kid to keep him from falling until he got the hang of it.
It's easy to tell when someone knows what they are talking about: what they tell you helps you to DO it. Many Christians solve their ignorance problem by claiming that what they don't know how to do is "impossible" or "not Scriptural." Those are sour grapes excuses. A better idea is to learn how to do it.
Anti-holiness arguments might not be intended as such, but their effect is to excuse us and let us persist in the UNBELIEF that powerful change isn't possible and that divine nature will only come at the end when we are "transformed." The arguments focus on what CAN'T happen and what we have to settle for in this life instead. Where is God's power in THAT? Paul taught DAILY transformation. You've read enough to know this. It doesn't happen magically at the end of a lukewarm life.
Anti-holiness arguments certainly do not affirm the power of God to change lives. Christian life-change tends to happen around the time of conversion, then wanes as time goes by and faith is replaced by church socialization processes. Spiritual development gets replaced by social and even material development: how many people you "help," how good your reputation for godliness becomes, how much money the church raises, how big and how many its properties are, and the size of its membership roster. Those things belong to earthly kingdoms, not heavenly kingdoms.
Saints are relatively normal believers who only did what they were supposed to do, just like the slaves of Luke 17:10. Why are they saints? Because the rest of us SUCK at it. Instead of admitting that we suck at it, we make normal believers into pinnacles of holiness.
How many people come to your church every week excited about the progress they made since last time against sinful habits and reactions?
Is the miracle of a check magically appearing in the mailbox more exciting than a miracle of showing love and patience in a situation that used to anger and irritate you?
Is a one-time miracle of showing love more exciting than understanding WHY you were prevented from showing love and HOW to love EVERY TIME you get in a similar situation?
Is understanding why you couldn't and how you can love every time more exciting than being SET FREE by the truth, so that you love as naturally and with as little effort as you used to get angry and irritated?
Do those scenarios increasingly attract you, or do forces muster within you to deny them?
When you have been set free to instinctively do what pleases God, so that your only thought about your previous anger and irritation is to pity the poor idiot you once were who didn't know any better, that might not be divine nature (who am I to say there is nothing better?) but it's a HELL OF A LOT BETTER than what Christians preach.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
How many in your church come each week having discovered something powerful and new about love that actually SHOWS OTHERS A WAY to love that they didn't see before? WHERE IS THE LIVING WATER?
No wonder atheists are getting fed up with believers. It's all a bunch of talk by butt-naked people running around pretending they sport the finest duds and have great fashion sense. You just "need faith" to see it.
Millard: Although you’ve made some valid points, I don’t agree with everything you’ve said. I think you and I are on the same page in some areas, but I also think we’ve had some differences in some of our observations.
“No wonder atheists are getting fed up with believers.”
It’s interesting that you’ve brought this up, because I’ve had this conversation with several people within recent history. I believe one reason ‘atheists are getting fed up with believers’ is they don’t truly understand what Christianity is and what it isn’t. In his last post, Harold used this quote, “Most students identified Christianity with a set of moralistic rules: Obey them and you’re good.”
When people understand Christianity to be ‘a set of moralistic rules’ and then see people not performing the way they expect them to – by the rules – they get ‘fed up’ and become critical of Christians. I don’t think anyone will argue that we, as Christians, are admonished to be Christ-like, holy, and godly people and if we truly love God, we should have a deep desire to be holy and glorify God with not only our words but also our actions.
But, I also think it is wise to be realistic and understand that we live IN THE WORLD where satan roams about looking for someone to devour and therefore sometimes we may have been or are the victim or recipient of others’ sins. Sometimes people may have long-term chronic illnesses, be the victims of child abuse, sex abuse, an abusive relative, a neglectful spouse, an alcoholic and/or neglectful parent, abusive and hurtful friendships, and/or a serious accident. Sometimes people are tempted and succumb to pressure from others, especially in their teenage years, and get hooked on alcohol or drugs. Sometimes after surgery, people get hooked on drugs. We all have some sort of baggage. Things such as these can psychologically scar us and affect our emotions, and/or state of mental condition and in turn our choices and reactions to others. Until we’ve walked in someone else’s shoes and experienced what they’ve experienced, we really can’t say how we would respond, feel, act, and/or behave. Churches are made up of damaged individuals, some who aren’t too proud to admit such. An atheist might judge people with such baggage because they aren’t bursting forth living water. If one has been sexually abused, he/she may have a difficult time recovering and experience the joy God wants us to have or if you’re experiencing a physical illness, you may be physically weak and not have the energy to be very expressive of our idea of ‘living water’.
But, I’m certain churches also have those who are only there for what they can gain from the social aspect of it, too. They aren’t there because they recognize their need for a Savior and their love of God. Every church has those who are phony and just use the church to pretend to be a Christian.
“Besides, the real question isn't whether or not any of us can arrive at some ideal state called "perfection." The real question is: Can we make ANY progress towards it? In other words, CAN WE GET BETTER? If not, we're stuck and it's not worth the effort to try. If we CAN get better, then ANY progress is better than none, and we should stop making excuses for not trying.”
The main topic of this blog has been the teachings and beliefs of Smiths’ Friends/Brunstad. The question of becoming perfect continues to be brought up because SF/Brunstad teaches that Jesus became perfect and so we can too. I would say we can make progress towards becoming more Christ-like and make choices not be ‘stuck’ in our sins, but that does not mean we are going to be perfect. If we give non-believing people the impression that Christianity is about people ‘living by rules’ or ‘being perfect’, and then they witness a Christian saying something that may hurt someone’s feelings or forget a coworker’s birthday or an unbelieving husband has an affair and leaves a Christian wife so she has no choice but divorce, or a Christian goes through surgery and needs pain meds for a while, ends up addicted to them, and then struggles to get off them, then non-believers become ‘fed up’ with Christians, calling them hypocrites. They have put expectations on them to be perfect rather than imperfect humans who are loved and forgiven by God, live in a sin-filled world, and do their best to follow Jesus and be obedient to Him. I am in no way saying that we shouldn’t make every effort to grow closer to Jesus and live a life of integrity, doing what’s right in God’s eyes. But, many times people are victims of their circumstances and people need time to heal, grow, and mature. Even David, who is referred to as ‘a man after God’s Own heart’ was a sinner who, when confronted, repented, and turned his heart back to God. Was he perfect? No, but God loved him and used him for His purposes anyway.
There are brand new Christians who may have just accepted Jesus as his/her Savior and LIVING WATER may not APPEAR to be flowing from them yet. Maybe they haven’t had any spiritual growth yet. As with babies, we won’t all ‘grow’ in our walk with Christ at the same rate. Some may never get out of the infant stage. I’ve known Christians whom I’ve had the privilege of knowing over a long period of time and have watched as they’ve acknowledged and repented of sin in their lives and grown closer to God. I’ve witnessed growth, progress, and ‘getting better’ (becoming more Christ-like). As God revealed their sin to them, they were convicted, and they repented.
“Claiming that Christians must continue in sin and rely on grace and forgiveness is clearly unbiblical.”
I don’t believe I said, nor did I intend to indicate that ‘Christians MUST continue in sin’.
1Jn 1:8-9, “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.”
1Jn 2:12, “I write to you, dear children, because your sins have been forgiven on account of His name.”
“How many in your church come each week having discovered something powerful and new about love that actually SHOWS OTHERS A WAY to love that they didn't see before? WHERE IS THE LIVING WATER?”
Actually, I see this often, not only in my church but in many churches around me. I consistently witness new people showing others love by sacrificing their own finances and time to clean up, build new homes, provide dental and medical treatments after natural disasters such as earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, and tsunamis, buying food and clothing, paying utility bills, etc for others all with no strings attached, out of love for God and for other people. I know people who have rescued and adopted babies from impoverished conditions, helped to build clean water supplies, and provide other necessary provisions for people overseas along with Christmas packages to young children. People also show love by sacrificing their own time to visit others in the hospital, sit with them when they are ill for long periods of time, drive them to doctor appointments, attend funerals (no one does those things for entertainment). We also show love by forgiving others when they have done something hurtful to us or those we love. I believe we show LIVING WATER when we speak the truth, treat other people with kindness, give so others will have a better life, and live a life of integrity.
Unconditional LOVE is a choice and sometimes it is not easy to do. God loved us even when we didn’t do anything to deserve that love. When someone hurts us, showing them love isn’t easy, but God not only tells us to, He demonstrates that for us. If we are truly exuding Living Water, we will show love to everyone, not only those that are easy to love.
1Jn 4:10-11, “This is love: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.”
In the churches I’ve attended throughout my life, there is emphasis put on living a life of holiness. When a pastor teaches how to live according to the Scriptures, that’s teaching holiness, is it not? Smiths’ Friends/Brunstad seems to put a lot of focus on being more holy. But is it more holy for a church leader to come between a young college student and her family and friends, move her into his house, try to hide it, and then lie about it? What does that do for the witness of Christianity, God, or Jesus Christ?
Sophie:
Thank you for your intelligent, considered response! I'm glad you don't agree and say why. That's how we can learn from each other.
As to atheists, I think your points are valid, but probably not high on the list of reasons that atheists are fed up with Christians. My conversations have been with atheists about atheists. They might not understand the details about Christianity or other religions, but many of them understand very well. Their primary concern with believers (not just Christians) is that they seem crazy. It seems crazy to believe that something is true not because you determined it was true, but simply because the Bible says so. To be fair, some of us believed that what the Bible says is true because we had experiences with the reality of God and Jesus, so there's that. A lot of churchgoers don't even have that. They were raised to believe or came to believe for other reasons. That doesn't make the Bible true. Atheists listen to believers and why they believe, and their reasons sound flimsy or downright circular. It seems crazy to stand on a flimsy platform or hang from a "sky hook" the kinds of weighty matters of life that believers are willing to die and kill for.
And that is just looking at believers from a rational standpoint. There is another standpoint: power. Believers could blow atheistic objections away with just a little power of God. Instead, what's left is the impotent kind of thing you described so well: charitable works. I'm not knocking charitable works per se. There are far too few of them, although the 21st Century might turn out to be a glaring contrast to the 20th if the interest in humanitarian works continues to increase like it has over the last few decades. I'm knocking Christian charitable works as a response to atheistic criticism. They actually aren't just a weak response, they amount to declaring that Christianity is NO DIFFERENT than atheistic humanism, because Christians don't clearly accomplish more than humanists do. Evangelicals fall WAY behind Catholics on charitable works. Even if Catholics do more good than charitable humanists, if Catholicism is the Christian answer to atheism, we might as well sack Rome once more and all go home.
There might be atheists who focus on the points you mentioned--moralism, poor behavior on the part of victims of abuse, etc. If so, they aren't very astute. Read Richard Dawkins' book "The God Delusion" and see what they are actually complaining about. These aren't stupid people.
The real problem is a pitiful lack of power in the Christian church. What you described in your post is a description of PRECISELY that pitiful lack of power, not a rebuttal to my claim that there's a lack. The lack doesn't come from new Christians struggling with addiction or other baggage. Those are actually the people in whom I've seen God's power at work most clearly. The pitiful lack is on the part of the Christians of 20, 30, 40, 50 years or more who understand nothing more about the power of God than looking good on Sunday and helping people out in ways that any moron with a bit of compassion would do just the same.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
Sophie: "Actually, I see this often, not only in my church but in many churches around me."
Your long list of what you see in your church and others around you sadly proves my point. And your post itself actually proves my point in a couple of ways.
First, you avoided the question. My question wasn't "Do you see anything at your church that you believe represents living water?" You even quoted my question before you wrote that long paragraph, then basically ignored it. Please read my post again. I was asking if there are people who come to your church EXCITED about NEW POWER that they have discovered and NEW UNDERSTANDING they got about how to exercise that power, understanding that helps others to get hold of that power, too. I wasn't asking about the "power" of showing charity. I was asking about power to live new life in new ways.
Second, from what you offered instead of responding to my question, it's clear that excitement and power are missing from your church. I'm not talking about enthusiasm for enthusiasm's sake. That's precisely what there IS in a lot of churches, which I tried to point out with my little preacher and the bicycle analogy. Listing good works was NOT a response to my question, but WAS admission by ommission that that there isn't anything better at your church. All those good works are good things, don't get me wrong. But they are no substitute for the kind of power we read about in the New Testament. If that kind of power were operating at your church, people would be excited in a way you probably have never seen (or maybe rarely see) and the "ungifted" (maybe even atheists!?!) would FALL ON THEIR FACES, "declaring that God is certainly among you." 1 Cor 14:24 Does anyone in your church believe in THAT kind of power? Do you see it there? If so, why didn't you write about it?
"I believe we show LIVING WATER when we speak the truth, treat other people with kindness, give so others will have a better life, and live a life of integrity." If those words were true--if people actually did speak the truth (instead of hiding their dirty secrets), actually did give so others will have a better life (instead of giving so that they can be known as pious givers), and actually lived a life of integrity (which means being WHOLE, not one way at home and another on Sunday,) you would see living waters flowing. I don't think you do. I'm sorry you have to resort to substitutes.
There are over 10,000 Protestant denominations. OVER TEN THOUSAND MAJOR FACTIOUS CONFLICTS THAT RESULTED IN ENDURING SCHISMS. For every denomination there are hundreds, maybe even thousands of individual congregations that split. That's money where their mouths are NOT. Those actions speak louder than a million words and countless good deeds. I bet you personally know of at least a few church splits and people who were involved in them. And I bet every one of those churches that split were filled with people who did lots of good deeds. The animosity and hatred that accompany church splits has nothing to do with the living water I'm talking about.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
You closed with a couple of rhetorical questions. I hope you don't think I'm defending Smith's Friends or what happened in OK. On the contrary, I got in trouble on this board a while back for blasting the posters here for being all talk and no action when it came to that situation. What did ANYONE do in response to that event? Did anyone protest to the school board? Did anyone stand outside the school with pickets asking that teacher BY NAME to account for what he did? Did anyone do anything at all? When it's all just talk and maybe some good deeds, I don't think there's much living water in the picture.
Besides, you missed the MOST important thing about all this. I keep asking, "Where is the living water?" I don't claim that I even know what it is except for a small, feeble inkling and just beginning to experience it. Why aren't you in as much need to find it as I am?
I agree with ya milliard when you say ""(which means being WHOLE, not one way at home and another on Sunday,) you would see living waters flowing."" I only get fresh blog posts happening on my blog if I'm in god's word every single day, and letting god's word do a work in my heart.
Isaiah 55:11 "So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." "Prosper" in that it will save me, if I let it do a work in my heart/life, it gives me peace, and hope, and joy.
A persons for reals going to be 1 of 2 rivers, a river of life w/waters of life flowing out of them to people and love, and joy, and peace etc. ----- or a river of hate etc. etc. etc. and the people with the much hate and sins they do many them hide it well..........but come judgement day that stuffs going to come out into the light ------- better to forgive each other now, love each other now. Be as much in god's word in the day, pray, love on as many people as you can in a day if that's just giving them a nice e-mail w/a bible verse ------- it's something it counts! Time is short, what we do in a day, does count..........whatever that be's......it's amounting to something in eternity.
I've learned to be faithful in the small things........in reading my bible, and praying everyday........somedays that's what I get done........it add's up.......you want waters of life flowing from ya it all adds up. What you sew into today you will reap -------- whether to the flesh, or to the spirit, you will reap that (maybe just a little bit but overtime it all adds up that's my point) at my aunts church this sunday they talked about the bible being "living" the "living word of god" and not dead pages in a book ------ that's how it is for me. With power to change my life and is changing my life ------ the life I would've lived without the word of god........vastly different. But what I lost in the world, I gained in christ!
It kind of bothers me when people lump all churches and denominations together as “mainstream Christianity” and say this is what they believe. All you have to do is walk into any Christian bookstore and you will find many different variations on just about any doctrinal issue including grace and forgiveness. Not all churches believe or preach the same thing. I’m not sure I really know what “mainstream” is. As far as I can tell the ONLY thing most Christians agree on is that 1. Jesus is the living Son of God. 2. He is coming back. I think even Smith’s Friends will agree with that.
Beyond this, I don’t think you can lump them all together even on the issue of grace and forgiveness. Yes, I agree that some churches may have a mixed up view of grace and forgiveness, but I also don’t believe it is our place to judge them or their salvation.
Millard’s question about “rivers of living water flowing from their innermost being” doesn’t really prove anything to me. Like Sophie, I have had the privilege of meeting some very humble and Godly people and if you asked them that question there is no doubt in my mind that they wouldn’t believe there was “living water” flowing from them either but their actions and deeds have had a profound impact on many people and that, in my opinion, is “living water”.
Jesus came “in the LIKENESS of sinful flesh.” I think that SF miss that word “likeness” and focus too much on the word “sinful”. I believe this implies that He, the Son of God who lived in Heaven, made a choice to come to earth, born in a body like ours. But He was still God, residing in a human body like ours. Yes, He was born as an infant and endured the process of growing, most likely stubbed His toe, had to use the bathroom, eat, drink, and all the other earthly bodily experiences we have in our sinful flesh. And the Bible says he experienced all that just like we do and was still “without sin”. Could He have sinned? Yes, I think so. Did He? The Bible says He didn’t.
I also believe that you can disagree with me on this issue and still be a committed Christian. This isn’t the main issue of this blog.
“The real question is: Can we make ANY progress towards it? In other words, CAN WE GET BETTER?”
I agree with much of what you write, Millard. I learned this idea of getting better as sanctification. Sanctification can be described as an inward spiritual process whereby God brings about holiness and change in the life of a Christian by means of the Holy Spirit. This is a working process in the life of every believer. Though the process is personal for each individual, the end goal is to prevent sin and produce spiritual growth. Sanctification has nothing to do with living in sinless perfection. We will never be sinless in this life. In fact, the Bible warns against such false teachings in 1 John 1:8: "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." Sanctification is not about trying to be sinless in order to earn the favor of God. Rather, sanctification is God’s will for us in order to please God. We will never achieve perfection and this means there is always room for improvement for everybody. The good news is that we don’t have to achieve absolute perfection in this world to be accepted into the next. So there is no excuse for not “getting better”.
As Millard pointed out, there is no law against the fruits of the Spirit because if you are following the example of Jesus then you are self-governing. Man’s laws are legalistic and only good for establishing some sense of law and order in an evil world. I think it was James Madison who wrote that our U.S. Constitution is incapable of governing anything but a Christian nation. The notion is that people who follow God’s laws govern themselves and they don’t need a long list of don’ts or an overbearing government bureaucracy. They will generally do the right thing given the freedom to do so. Therefore, as we grow farther and farther from being a Christian nation (assuming you could ever say we were), then the need for more and more man made laws.
Ultimately, I think this is why Jesus blasted the Pharisees. In their efforts to define what God wanted they were more concerned with the outward appearances and controlling outward behavior as if that would make them more righteous. The message of Jesus is that rules and laws don’t get you there. It’s a heart issue.
That’s my problem with the Owasso Christian Fellowship (aka DKM). They CLAIM to follow Jesus but what kind of heart is it that purposefully separates a young girl from her family, both emotionally and physically, so that they can have a free live-in nanny for their children.
What does it say about their heart when they assault people, threaten to sue them, and lie to and about them?
What does it say about their heart when they take legal action in court to change zoning laws so that they can build their church, when a lot of people of the community are against it?
What does it say when they avoid taxes by mixing for-profit businesses with non-profit churches?
All of these things show what’s in their heart. They can boast all they want about how righteous they are. They can accumulate wealth and members in the church but their deeds have demonstrated what they are at their core and there are many witnesses to these actions.
Millard asked the questions, “What did ANYONE do in response to that event? Did anyone protest to the school board? Did anyone stand outside the school with pickets asking that teacher BY NAME to account for what he did? Did anyone do anything at all?”
I believe there are a lot of things that have happened, and are still happening, behind the scenes. But it is hard for any of us to second guess the girl’s family or the school board without knowing all the facts.
There is something else that is interesting to me. This Owasso group seems to be changing their outward behavior in order to appear more like those they call harlots. If they have the truth and are truly different, then why change. If the long skirts and head coverings were so much more righteous, why change. If they have had a change of heart, then they should seek to reconcile with those who believe they have been wronged. The Old Testament laws speak to this in Leviticus 6:2-5.
“If anyone sins and is unfaithful to the Lord by deceiving a neighbor about something entrusted to them or left in their care or about something stolen, or if they cheat their neighbor, or if they find lost property and lie about it, or if they swear falsely about any such sin that people may commit— when they sin in any of these ways and realize their guilt, they must return what they have stolen or taken by extortion, or what was entrusted to them, or the lost property they found, or whatever it was they swore falsely about. They must make restitution in full, add a fifth of the value to it and give it all to the owner on the day they present their guilt offering.”
This girl’s family has on several occasions asked to sit down and discuss these things with the leader of this SF church but so far he has refused to acknowledge any involvement with the girl or even admit that she lived in their house.
What they appear to be doing is attempting to just cover up their past. They seem to want to cover their tracks as if those things never really happened. I guess they are hoping that it just goes away. If they really believed that they were righteous in their actions then they should be willing to discuss with the girl’s family their beliefs and what led them to their actions.
They are still keeping the girl from having a real relationship with her family. The fact that they hurt other people in the process doesn’t seem to concern them. Hypocrisy and self-centeredness is the very thing that Jesus preached against.
There is a debate going on in the realm of missionary evangelism which has a connection to this issue. Missionaries who manage to convert someone to Christianity whose family is a different religion many times will work to remove that convert from their families and send them somewhere else to protect or educate their new convert. I have heard missionaries who speak against this and encourage new converts to stay and remain immersed with their family and friends. The debate is about how Christianity is viewed by other cultures when a new convert is separated and isolated from their former friends and family. From their point of view, this is exactly how cults are viewed by others outside the group.
So in this situation, the SF group may believe they have won a convert to their group but in the process they have alienated and divided themselves from many in the community. Is that helping or hurting their cause? Is that the image of Christ they want to present to a community of other Christians? I don’t think so.
Millard: The comments I made were based on conversations I’ve had with Christians, some who are former atheists and became Christians and also with some current atheists. I’m just referring to the information I’ve been given by the people I’ve spoken with. I agree that they’re not stupid people. I will attempt to read the book ‘The God Delusion’ by Richard Dawkins that you recommended. He was a guest on the Bill O’Reilly Show recently. Just as atheists may believe Christians have nothing on which to base their beliefs, I believe he failed to provide any convincing scientific proofs that there is NO GOD and that our world just somehow came into being. To his credit, he only had a few minutes on the show, so perhaps given more time, he could provide more reasons for his beliefs.
You asked: “How many in your church come each week having discovered something powerful and new about love that actually SHOWS OTHERS A WAY to love that they didn't see before? WHERE IS THE LIVING WATER?”
Apparently I misunderstood your question. Since the ‘church’ I attend is a large congregation, there is no way of knowing ‘HOW MANY come each week having discovered something powerful and new about love that show others a way to love that they didn’t see before’. It is difficult to count’ HOW MANY come each week’, let alone try to count ‘HOW MANY come each week having discovered something powerful and new about love that show others a way to love that they didn’t see before.’ So, I tried to state what I have witnessed and believe is a manifestation of Christian love put into action.
“I was asking if there are people who come to your church EXCITED about NEW POWER that they have discovered and NEW UNDERSTANDING they got about how to exercise that power, understanding that helps others to get hold of that power, too. I wasn't asking about the "power" of showing charity. I was asking about power to live new life in new ways.”
Although I may still not understand your question, I’ll make another attempt to answer it. But, before I do, I’d like to make an observation. It appears what you’re doing seems to be a typical tactic of the SF/Brunstad group. By bashing/criticizing Christians, you’re taking the focus off the original question that started this discussion in the first place. This discussion began because of what a local school teacher who ‘claimed’ to be a Christian did to one of his students and her family. The question, “Is this a cult?” was asked by someone who apparently has known the girl’s family for a long time. What he had witnessed didn’t make sense, doesn’t line up with Christianity, and what the Bible teaches, so he asked a question about Smith’s Friends/Brunstad which claims to be a Christian group.
By being critical of ‘mainstream’ Christians and making statements such as, “….. it's clear that excitement and power are missing from your church,” you’re doing what I believe this teacher has done. I don’t believe you know what church I attend, who worships there, what is taught there, and if there is excitement and power there or not so your statement really is not founded. From what I’ve learned, I believe this is the same tactic this school teacher (and others in groups such as this) use to get people dissatisfied with their own church, loved ones and draw them away, and lure them into their group. Rather than staying focused on Jesus, His power, His love, His amazing gift to us, and His Word, they bash other Christians, the churches they are associated with, their family and friends and turn them against everyone except those in SF/Brunstad. You’re bashing Christians and Christian groups you have no personal experience with.
Now I will attempt to answer your question. I do know people who come to the church I attend (and other churches) excited about the new understanding they have about the unwavering, unconditional, undying, and powerful love of Jesus Christ and what they have learned about HIS power and the power of HIS love and what it can do when we look at others as Jesus does, as a creation of God, rather than in a selfish way (what can we do to show love to others, not what they can do for us).
They are excited about the new understanding they have acquired that God is powerful enough to forgive and love them-no matter what they have done in their lives-it frees them from the guilt and shame that satan so loves to shackle us with. They are excited to learn about the power of forgiveness and what it can do in their lives to reconcile them not only to God but also to others. They are excited to learn that reconciliation in broken/damaged relationships is possible by following the teachings that can be found in God’s Word.
I’ve known people who are excited about the new understanding they have that they don’t need to get vengeance on others, but have learned to leave room for God’s wrath. They’ve learned to trust in God and His power in difficult situations or when someone has wronged them. I don’t think an atheist has that. I think someone who doesn’t have faith in God and His power may feel the need to get vengeance on others who have hurt them.
Another thing I’ve witnessed repeatedly among Christians is eternal hope, the new understanding of the promise that a believer has even when they know the physical body in which they reside is dying and they know they are leaving this life. They have the faith, trust, and peace that what they believe to be true, God supplies-a spiritual life in heaven with their Creator, a life that goes on beyond the physical life of the body. They believe in something greater than themselves. They believe in a heaven and a hell. Although they may be sad (which is not a lack of faith, but a God-given emotion) for the family that is left behind, they are at peace with physical death.
I know people who are excited about their new understanding of the generosity and compassion of Jesus. I know people who are excited because their heart has been changed by their new understanding that Jesus loves them so much that He gave up the comforts of heaven to come down to earth and live in this world among sinful people, show a better way to live, and die a painful death in order to demonstrate Who God is and how much He loves us. As a result of this new understanding of Christ’s sacrifice and love, they have, too, have become more loving, Christ-like people. They are willing to freely share what God is doing/has done in their lives and share what God has blessed them with. I’ve heard people verbally testifying, but I’ve also witnessed a true heart change in others by seeing their actions. They didn’t have to TELL someone about it because the testimony of their actions spoke louder than any words.
I’ve said many times before that there is no perfect church, because churches are made up of imperfect people. As Christians, we should keep our focus on Jesus Christ, not on how deficient, horrible everyone and everything is.
Hebrews 12:2, “Let us keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before Him, endured the cross, scorning its shame and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.”
I agree that there are people in every church congregation that are there only for how it benefits them, personal contacts, or the social part of it. They may call themselves a Christian, but they really make no effort to read the Scriptures, do a Bible study, take time to pray, learn more about Jesus, or obey Him and grow in the Word. They may only show up on a Sunday morning or a Wednesday night to be seen and viewed by outsiders as ‘Christian’, make friends, and have social activities in which to participate. They have no real commitment to Jesus Christ.
But, I’m sure that even Smith’s Friends/Brunstad has those in their group who are not really Christians, but rather just a part of their ‘church’. They claim that they are ‘more holy’, ‘more serious’, etc. but do more serious, true Christians really threaten people, deceive people, assault people, lie, separate and divide a person from her family and friends by moving her from a dorm and into their house?
We live in a world in which we see moral values crumbling with people living in selfishness and greed doing things like lying, hurting others, threatening, stealing, cold-blooded murder, intentionally dividing loved ones, gossiping, slandering, cursing, drug and alcohol addictions, going on drunken binges, coveting what others have, frivolous lawsuits, promiscuity, aborting babies, killing their own child which seems to becoming more common. When we see Christians living a righteous life, obeying what is written in God’s Word, helping others, to me that is a demonstration of their excitement for Jesus and His love.
In John 14:15, Jesus said, “If you love Me, you will obey My commands.”
Sophie, I'm sorry you interpreted my post as "bashing Christians." I am just frustrated that so many are so satisfied with so little. Atheists would have much less to say if there were more than just do-goodism in Christian churches.
SF/Brunstad tactics are rhetorical. They bash Christians in order to make themselves look good in contrast. My questions weren't rhetorical in the least.
The examples you gave and the way that both you and Harold hold the line that Christianity as you know it exemplifies "rivers of living water" are pitiful.
My posts were absolutely germaine to the topic of the board. In the five years since Keith posted this topic, no one has reported ANYTHING that has been DONE to OVERCOME the evil of the situation in Owasso. We are called to overcome evil with good, not just put up with it without becoming evil ourselves and then vent about it on an Internet forum. I pointed out our deplorable lack of the power to overcome evil with good several times. So far, the only responses I've gotten back basically try to justify the lack. I can't get over how sad that is.
I am looking, as I always have been, for something real. That search led me into Smith's Friends and it led me out. I am personally in distress over the pitiful lack of the life and power of Jesus in my own life. You seem to think I'm writing for effect. I don't waste my time waxing rhetorical, especially not with people I don't even know. These things are serious to me. I'm sorry, your posts make me sad for all of us. If this is as good as it gets, any faith that Jesus will find on the earth when he returns will be puny and scant.
Your comments about churches being made up of imperfect people and offering the contrast of "people living in selfishness and greed doing things like lying, hurting others, threatening, stealing, cold-blooded murder, intentionally dividing loved ones, gossiping, slandering, cursing, drug and alcohol addictions, going on drunken binges, coveting what others have, frivolous lawsuits, promiscuity, aborting babies, killing their own child" just confirm and stress my point. You implicitly accept Christian imperfections as they are. After all, they compare favorably with ungodliness. That's not the hunger and thirst for righteousness that Jesus spoke about.
Sophie, my comments were not made in ignorance, and I clearly qualified them. You dismissed their basis, understandably. They were based on YOUR descriptions of your church and knowledge of other Christians and, presumably, your own personal experience. You claim NOTHING that's any better than the goodness and power of atheistic charity workers, and you seem not only content with it, but you defend it. Call me a basher if you like. I want more than that. I hope you do, too, or that someday you will.
So Millard, you claim to want more and you look down at poor pitiful people like me. What is it you are looking for? What is it that would satisfy your search? Should I stand on the street corner and pray out loud all day, every day? Should I shout from a rooftop about my faith so that everyone would hear? Do I need to perform miracles for you? Just exactly what is it that you call ‘living water’?
You said “I don't claim that I even know what it is except for a small, feeble inkling and just beginning to experience it.” You don’t really know what it is but you are quick to denounce other views as inadequate.
I believe that Jesus came to show us how to live and what God expects of us and in this context it is His example that should be the standard for ‘living water’. What did He do?
In Mat 7:22-23 Jesus says: “Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
In this example we have people who prophesy in the name of Jesus Christ. They even have power to drive out demons in the name of Jesus, yet Jesus says to them “Away from me, you evildoers”.
These prophets have power! Power to drive out demons! Yet that is not enough to enter the kingdom of heaven? If you met someone like that would you be able to discern the difference? Would you be fooled by this false prophet as an example of ‘living water’?
Take the example of the rich man and the beggar named Lazarus in Luke 16. The rich man received many good things in his life. I’m sure he did many good things for other people as well. What is it that separated Lazarus? What did Lazarus DO to earn an eternity in heaven? According to the scriptures he laid at the gate and begged for food, yet the angels carried him into heaven, and not the rich man. What is the ‘living water’, that power, that Lazarus represents to you?
You are also critical of those in this community for not doing anything about this school teacher; for not striking back at this man for what he has done. Is that your idea of Christianity? An eye for an eye, tooth for tooth? Is that the example that Jesus laid out for us? In order for good to triumph over evil, should it be our goal that this teacher should lose his job? Would this satisfy your definition of power and ‘living water’?
Harold:
Haha! Your post reads like "healer, heal thyself!" Problem being I'm not a healer--I'm in need of one. And I'm looking for others who feel the same way. I'm sick, and I see a bunch of sick people all around me. I don't believe people who tell me that they aren't sick, especially when the quality of their lives is no better than mine. I've listened carefully to those who preach that they have the answers, and I've checked some of them out. They turned out to be liars. What am I to think about others who preach the same message as the liars I know?
I've tried to give thoughtful responses to all of your questions. As a result, this is pretty long. The only one I ommitted was your "What did He [Jesus] do?" Sorry, I just couldn't take that one seriously.
Morphing my question into a metaphysical "WHAT are living waters?" was a dodge, as metaphysical questions often turn out to be. My question was "WHERE are the living waters?" If you know what living waters are and where they are, why haven't you said so? If you don't, why don't you admit it? If we're all in the dark about what living waters are, then we're all in dire need and should be helping each other out to find them. What then are you defending? <<--(Sincere, non-rhetorical question)
You and Sophie have the opportunity to find living waters and let us know about them. I'll do the same, if you are interested. All I've heard from you so far are descriptions and defenses of the WAY THINGS ALREADY ARE. If THIS is ALL that living waters can produce, GOD IS A WIMP. I don't believe that God is a wimp. I suspect that the problem is what Jesus feared would be the problem: when he comes again, will he find faith on the earth? Do you think that Jesus will be happy with our good works when HE asks, "Where are the living waters?" Maybe you do.
Yes, I have a small, feeble inkling about living waters compared to the kind of life and power that I read about in the New Testament. Partly, I don't want to assume that I know things about it until my understanding and ESPECIALLY MY EXPERIENCE have been tested and are more reliable. But don't make the mistake of thinking that my inkling amounts to nothing. It's enough to help me know when I run into facsimiles of righteousness that deny the power of God. It's also enough to help me recognize when I meet real righteousness and power. My complaint is that there is SO DAMNED LITTLE OF IT. You and Sophie apparently think that the supply is adequate. You seem to interpret my complaints that we don't have MORE as attacks on what you already have. I guess that might make sense if what you have is all you ever hope to get.
Just so you don't jump to more conclusions, none of what I've written in this post so far insinuates ANYTHING about you personally, particularly not anything beyond what you have written on this forum. I consciously try to avoid bullshit, rhetorical insinuation, contrary to the custom of many Christians--especially preachers--that I've experienced in the 40 years since I became a believer. I try to say what I mean and I mean what I say. I'm not implying things about you. I'm responding to what you wrote and honestly stating--not implying--what I've experienced with Christians I personally know. I don't know you or what kind of person you are. That's for you to let us know as you wish.
My comments weren't denouncements of your views or of the good things that, for example, Sophie listed about her church. Helping others is good. Loving others is good. Doing good is good. There's far too little of it, and THAT is what I'm denouncing, along with your apparent lack of interest (judging from what YOU have written) in improving the situation. If I'm wrong about that, I'll retract and apologize. So far, though, what you wrote doesn't indicate that I'm wrong.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
I DENOUNCE (thanks for the term, I like it) satisfaction with--and defense of--the deplorably poor state of Christianity and how far it's strayed from Jesus' message. If you also feel that things are deplorable, i.e., you hunger and thirst for MUCH MORE righteousness than what WE already have, (notice that I include myself, so if I'm denouncing you, I'm denouncing myself; I'm fine with that,) your attention would be focused on the same thing that mine is focused on: MUCH MORE. How do you think that revivals happen, anyway--lots and lots of people who are SATISFIED with the way things are? (Haha, OK, that one's rhetorical!) You and Sophie pointed out examples of how things are now, and my response is that things SUCK as they are now. You apparently took that personally. Clinging to the adequacy of how things are now and defending it is your choice. Again, if I'm wrong, I'll retract and apologize, but give me some reason to do so other than just baldly claiming that I'm wrong.
You posed a slew of rhetorical questions and didn't offer a single answer to them of your own. They seem like examples of the insinuation tactic I mentioned above. They were interesting questions though.
I love the passage in Matt. 7. To answer your question whether I would recognize a false prophet who could work miracles and drive out demons; yes, I would. I have. It's not like they are hard to spot. Could I be mistaken? Of course. False positives (I wrongly think someone is a false prophet) are difficult to deal with, but the risk of them is pretty low. Preachers are pretty much like used car salesmen. If their lips are moving, they're lying. My apologies to the few honest preachers out there. False negatives (wrongly thinking someone is NOT a false prophet) are much more common, but protecting us from our own ignorance and granting us sight is God's job, and that's what trusting God and being humble enough to recognize our mistakes are for. When you honestly call an honest person a liar, they tend to wonder what THEY did to give you such a false impression. And when you realize your mistake, honest people are more than willing to forgive you, because they've made the same mistake themselves, many times.
I'll try to detangle the mix of assumptions and projections that your rhetorical questions seem to represent:
>> Matt. 7 questions: You seem to assume that someone who drives out demons, performs miracles, and utters prophecies that come true could lead believers astray. Why do you assume that? (non-rhetorical) Jesus said that an EVIL and ADULTEROUS generation seeks for signs, NOT believers. Signs FOLLOW believers; believers don't follow signs. He made clear in Matt. 7:15-20 that we will know them by their fruits. Congregation size and bank account balances weren't the fruits that he was talking about. Doing lots of good works for other people weren't those fruits, either. Some examples of what he WAS talking about are love, honesty, commitment and loyalty to INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE, NOT groups or organizations or "faiths" (i.e., belief systems.) I'm sure that you already know what the fruits of the spirit are.
You seem to make the same logical flip that a lot of people make with the subject of signs and their relationship to faith. Jesus said, "These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover." Mark 16:17-18 In other words, belief (or faith, as we are more used to calling it,) comes first, and if it is present, signs will follow (accompany after.)
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
So, if there are NO signs, it's PROOF that faith is lacking or absent. Here's the erroneous flip that many people make: if signs are present, they are evidence of faith. No, signs don't do that. Signs indicate the POSSIBILITY that faith is present. Signs could also indicate that false prophets are performing them in order to lead astray, if possible, the elect. Signs alone aren't sufficient to decide whether faith is behind them. People who think that signs are sufficient indicators of faith don't understand faith.
So, here is a NON-rhetorical question that I'd like you to answer, since you brought the topic up: What WOULD tell us whether genuine faith is behind signs and good deeds? That would be important to know if we wanted to avoid being deceived in the last days.
>> Example of Lazarus. Interesting mix of assumptions here, too. First, your question assumes that I think there is something that Lazarus could have done to earn an eternity in heaven. Earning heaven is an alternative that occurred to you, not me. I infer from this that the only way you manage to understand my views is to construe them as a form of righteousness by works. That would be wrong; my views don't imply that. Apparently, though, that's the only way you seem able to understand them. What's more, you and Sophie responded to my question, "WHERE are the living waters?" by listing a bunch of good works. Good works, like any other kind of sign, do not demonstrate the righteousness of faith. Why would you want me to accept them as evidence of living waters? (non-rhetorical)
You didn't articulate what YOU think is the reason that Lazarus went to heaven, if that's indeed where it was. You seem to assume that heaven lies across an impassable chasm from Hades, which remains in plain view for the eternal, morbid satisfaction of heaven-dwellers and torment of Hades-dwellers. I suppose that's a possibility, although Hades isn't necessarily hell or eternal, and the bosom of Abraham isn't necessarily heaven. Regardless, why do YOU think that Lazarus went to Abraham's bosom? (non-rhetorical)
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
You also assume that there's a relationship between living waters and the reason that Lazarus ended up in the bosom of Abraham. Abraham's statement makes very clear at least one reason why Lazarus was in his bosom: he was being comforted after a lifetime of suffering. So, if there is anything to the connection between living waters and Lazarus, a connection that YOU asked about, living waters and suffering must be connected. Paul seems to confirm this:
More than that, I count 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 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, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.
-- Phil. 3:8-11
So, having the righteousness through faith in Christ AND knowing Jesus in the power of his resurrection AND the fellowship of his sufferings AND being conformed to his death ALL seem inextricably connected. I'd suggest that living waters are included in "the power of his resurrection." Notice that Paul didn't consider "the resurrection from the dead" as a foregone conclusion, like most Evangelicals do. "...that I might ATTAIN TO the resurrection from the dead." I haven't yet met an Evangelical who could explain what these things are and how they work instead of explaining them away. Preachers and theologians are experts at "nullifying and making void and of no effect" the word of God through their traditions. Mark 7:13 (Amplified Bible) When faced with conflicting interpretations of Scripture, I always choose the one that BETTER enables me to experience the life of Christ; in other words, the one with MORE POWER.
So, my non-rhetorical questions to you on this point are: HOW are sufferings and living water connected, and HOW do they enable us to attain to the resurrection from the dead? If you have a perspective on this, I'd love to hear it, because I'm still in discovery on those points.
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
>> "Striking back" at the school teacher. Wow. That's what you got from what I wrote? When people project ideas onto me that I neither expressed nor in fact advocate, it tells me something about me and something about them. It tells me that I failed to express my ideas in a way that they could understand. It also tells me that they didn't recognize the ideas that I expressed, so they lumped my ideas into a bucket that they DID understand, even though my ideas don't belong there.
My non-rhetorical question to you on this is: Instead of DOING NOTHING, are eye for an eye and "striking back" the only alternatives that YOU can think of? I'm not even there in Owasso, and you want ME to tell YOU what should be done? (non-rhetorical) Is it so unclear that you ask a stranger what he would do? (non-rhetorical) Why not at least ask the infamous, "What would Jesus do?" (non-rhetorical) Is your real answer to THAT question, "Nothing"?? (NON-RHETORICAL!)
I actually did make a couple of suggestions and ASKED if anyone had done ANYTHING. That was an open, non-rhetorical question. You have implicitly answered it: apparently NOTHING was done. And you apparently fault me for asking. Can't you think of something CONSTRUCTIVE that would actually OVERCOME EVIL in that situation instead of just doing NOTHING? (non-rhetorical) All that has been done, as far as I'm aware, is that many have "struck back" rhetorically on an Internet forum, including you. The kingdom of God does not consist in words, but in power. 1 Cor. 4:20 I lament the evident lack of power in modern Christianity. So, frankly, do atheists. I have a good friend and atheist, a very honest and upright man, who would probably change his mind if he heard less blind faith BLEATING and saw a little more REAL WOOL on the part of Christians.
Should the teacher lose his job? (rhetorical) OF COURSE HE SHOULD, if he did what people claim that he did. How far different is that kind of abuse of authority and power from other kinds of abuse, such as sexual abuse, for example? (non-rhetorical--I think they are very similar, btw) Should he lose his job if he sexually abused a student? (rhetorical--I THINK I already know your answer...) If so, what would make firing appropriate in that case but not in this one? (non-rhetorical) The abuse of position and personal power is the same. The damage to family relationships is probably WORSE in this case.
Besides, I suspect that the reluctance to do ANYTHING--even going so far as to defend the inaction, as you seem to be doing--has NOTHING to do with genuine concern for the teacher, assuming that the postings on this blog aren't flat out hypocritical fabrications. Who objected when John basically consigned the teacher and SF to hell? (rhetorical) I did. I can't remember if you did or not. I don't remember anyone strongly objecting to John's malicious posts. I have also defended SF against accusations that exagerrate their cultish characteristics. I don't defend SF, but I do object to slander and misrepresentation. Yet, you seem to think that I'm the one being harsh! LOL!
cont'd...
(...cont'd)
I haven't seen a SHRED of empathy for the teacher expressed on this blog until now, when suddenly you're concerned about his employment status? (rhetorical) Please. I suspect that the reluctance of people in Owasso to ACT (as opposed to just TALK) involves what it almost always involves: concern for self when faced with an opportunity to be witnesses for a truth that seems risky to SELFISH concerns, such as reputations. What WOULD people say? (sic) Please don't cover self-interested fears over with mock concern for the teacher, if that's what your comments were about.
I'd like answers to ALL the non-rhetorical questions above. I'll be HAPPY to answer ALL non-rhetorical questions that you have about my views, but I can't answer for views that you project onto me simply because they are the only way you are able to relate to what I wrote. And I won't waste my time with rhetorical questions that seem intended only to insinuate things that you, for whatever reasons, aren't willing to state outright.
Even more interesting than your rhetorical questions is an assumption that threads through all of them.
You framed what you DID write about righteousness in terms that would be apparent and understandable to people whether or not they have faith, resembling what Paul called being "justified by works" in Romans. If you have an alternate understanding of righteousness, please describe it. Your assumption seems to be that the only alternative to your UNSTATED understanding of what WOULD BE "enough to enter the kingdom of heaven" is the righteousness of works, which you implictly seem to reject. I can't find anything else in what you wrote. Not much to work with. I am partial to the idea of justification by faith, but that's just me. ;)
Even ATHEISTS can recognize miracles, demon exorcism, prophecies that come true, and good, loving deeds. They don't deny that the events happened; they just explain God out of the picture in BLIND FAITH that "there must be a reasonable (read "selfish") explanation" for such things.
The righteousness of God is revealed "from faith to faith." Rom. 1:17. Jesus thanked God, after denouncing the cities in which most of his miracles were done, saying, "You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants." Matt. 11:25 Any fool would wonder whether someone who walks on water has God's power. Those without faith will probably be deceived by false prophets who can walk on water and more, precisely because they are blind to the righteousness of God. I wonder if your views on the questions you posed can enlighten us about how to recognize real faith, so that we won't be deceived by false prophets? I'd really like to hear them, seriously.
(cont'd...)
(...cont'd)
Like I said, Matt. 7:21-23 are some of my favorite verses. About them, I have two last non-rhetorical questions for you. The most important thing that Jesus said he will declare to practitioners of lawlessness is that HE NEVER KNEW THEM. Most Evangelicals are preoccupied with US KNOWING HIM. Jesus didn't mention that. In fact, Jesus didn't even mention people that the miracle-workers led astray. The miracle-workers will CLAIM that THEY KNOW JESUS, and Jesus WILL NOT contradict them. He won't tell them, "No, you never really knew me." What he WILL say allows for the possibility that they DO know him. His silence on that point either means that they DO INDEED "know him" or that the issue won't be important enough to comment on. What WILL BE important is that they will be FOCUSED ON THE WRONG QUESTION. Whether they know Jesus will be beside the point.
Since you imply that you know something about these verses, (enough to use them as an argument, anyway,) please answer the following non-rhetorical questions:
1. What did Jesus mean by saying that HE NEVER knew THEM? In other words, how could Jesus possibly NOT know someone?
2. Seeing that being KNOWN BY HIM seems so crucial, HOW can we be known by him? In other words, what can we do to be known by him, or is there anything that we CAN do?
Those aren't rhetorical questions, because I'm trying to understand them and find answers. If you have any answers, I sincerely would like to hear them. If you don't have answers, then how about we look for them together, as brothers? (SINCERE AND NON-RHETORICAL QUESTION!)
Millard: I really liked your post. And you asked a LOT of questions. I usually try to avoid these questions because the people asking are attempting take the focus off of SF behaviors and drag the discussion into endless theological debates where there are a lot of grey areas where there is no right or wrong. But I believe you are sincere and are truly looking for answers.
I’m also glad that you admit you need a healer. I do too. We all do. It seems that you have had the same experience as many people, non-Christians and Christians as well. That is: Some Christians can be so mean.
I don’t pretend to have all the answers, maybe not even some answers but I would sincerely like to explore those issues with you, as brothers. I am grateful that you expressed that sentiment. What follows is my attempt, as feeble as it may be, to give some thoughts on your questions.
Question #1:
“My question was "WHERE are the living waters?" If you know what living waters are and where they are, why haven't you said so? If you don't, why don't you admit it? If we're all in the dark about what living waters are, then we're all in dire need and should be helping each other out to find them. What then are you defending?”
The term “living water” turns up in scripture (at least my translation, I will use the NIV) at several places. The first is where God speaks through the prophet Jeremiah (Jer 2:13) and says: “My people have committed two sins: They have forsaken me, the spring of living water, and have dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold water. See also Jer 17:13
There is another reference in prophecy of Zechariah 14:8 that is interesting to discuss but I would challenge anyone to KNOW for sure what that means. I think it is a prophecy that is yet to come.
In John 14:10, Jesus, talking to the woman at the well says: “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”
In John 7:38 Jesus says: “Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive.”
And finally in Rev 7:17 one of the elders in Heaven says to John: “For the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd; He will lead them to springs of living water. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.”
In my opinion, when God, speaking through the prophet Jeremiah is referring to Himself as the “spring of living water”, He is claiming to be the source of the living water. And Jesus says to the woman at the well that He can give her living water. Then in John 7:38 Jesus directly connects the living water with the Holy Spirit.
So WHERE is the living water? Or you could also ask; WHERE is the Holy Spirit?
Peter said in Acts 2:38 “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
So, again my opinion, the living water should be living in and welling forth from followers of Jesus Christ. This is my view on your question.
But this points to another question that is; if the Holy Spirit, or living water, is supposed to be springing forth from Christians, and the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, etc., why can some of them be so mean? Not only can they mean to others, but to each other as well.
Gandhi said, “I like your Christ. I don’t like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” He had a point.
Maybe, like you suggested, I have failed to express myself clearly. I don’t defend things as they are as being righteousness. I agree with you that much to do with the state of the church today is a sad excuse and I am sorry if you interpreted my posts as defending the whole Christian community as righteous. There are a lot of people who profess to be Christians but don’t live like it. I may fall into that pit far too often myself.
But then again, you can look at the glass as half empty of you could look at it as half full. There is a lot of good happening in the world today. Think of what the state of the world would be without the church, as feeble as it is. Who are the people responding to needs, and disasters, around the world? It is usually some organization connected with the church that is leading the way.
I also believe that God can use, and has used, unbelievers to do His work throughout history. So when you look at who may not be professed believers doing good works, maybe, just maybe, God is using them and they just don’t know it. I don’t know. I’m just saying that you seem to have a very pessimistic view of the world.
Maybe I’m the naïve one. But I have met people in my church who have had miraculous things happen to them. I have met some whose lives have been transformed because they have found the truth in Jesus Christ. I have seen these things happen so it leads me to have the opinion that God is at work in this world. So I choose to look at the glass as half full.
I would like to bring up another perspective related to this subject. I tend to think that if you have the Holy Spirit living in you and you do make a mistake, the Holy Spirit would convict you and lead you to make amends to anyone you may have offended. God calls us to live at peace with everyone as far as it depends on us.
Rom 12:18:“If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone”
Mat 5:23-24: “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift.”
This passage shows that we can make mistakes and sometimes not know it or forget, but if we do come to that point where we realize we have done something wrong, we should try as far as it depends on us to reconcile with those persons.
Applying this to this school teacher in question (Brunstad Christian Church and Owasso Christian Fellowship) they all know what they have done. They intentionally, with malice and forethought coerced this young woman into their home knowing full well that they would destroy her relationship with her former friends and family. And it appears that they just DON’T CARE. If they really cared and had the Holy Spirit living in them then they would accept the offers to talk with this other family and make things right but they refuse to acknowledge any responsibility for this situation. They cannot do this and have the Holy Spirit (a.k.a living water) too. I just believe that is not possible.
Question #2:
“You seem to assume that someone who drives out demons, performs miracles, and utters prophecies that come true could lead believers astray. Why do you assume that?”
You made an assumption about what I believe and then went into great detail about what was wrong about my belief. Very interesting. But many people have been fooled by charlatans who fake healings and offer up prophecies that are proven false. Some people continue to follow these prophets even after their prophecies don’t come true. Take Harold Camping for instance. He predicted the end of the world 12 times but still had a faithful following.
If these people can be fooled, how much so could people be fooled by someone who performs genuine miracles. So yes, I believe that Mat 24:24 implies that even some true believers will be deceived.
Question #3:
What WOULD tell us whether genuine faith is behind signs and good deeds?”
You answered your own question “we will know them by their fruits”. But you also quoted from Mark 16:9-20 about believers drinking deadly poison and according to my study Bible there are serious questions about this part of Mark’s gospel.
Jesus also said in Luke 11:29: “This is a wicked generation. It asks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah.”
The scriptures are clear that Jesus, through the Holy Spirit, endowed the apostles with the power to heal people and drive out demons. These powers were, I think, used to authenticate the apostles not only for others but for themselves as well. But is there any hard evidence that would indicate that these powers were passed on through the apostles to succeeding generations? I don’t know. It’s a question that I have which goes along with a discussion earlier on this blog about modern day prophets. Are there modern day prophets who have been endowed with the power from God to heal the lame and cure the sick? I have my doubts.
Is it possible that the “sign of Jonah”, the resurrection, is the only sign that we need. In the parable about Lazarus, Abraham says “If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.” Should we trust anyone who performs signs or miracles? On the other hand good deeds are something that can be vetted. And like most things, if they are true they will stand up to all examinations. They will stand the test of time, as they say. Like the Bible itself has stood up to all true examinations so far throughout history so I believe it can be trusted as the true word of God.
Take this local SF group as an example again. They have caused damage to others in the past and refuse to acknowledge that they have done anything wrong. So when they now want to do good deeds, is it genuine, or are they just trying to cover up their past? Can there be any true repentance without acknowledging and admitting your wrongdoing in the past? They may be trying to put on a different face but I believe their motives are all wrong and their faith is not genuine.
Let me stress here again that I don’t claim to have all the answers, and sometimes I have more questions than answers. But my doubts and questions are not a sign of unbelief. And I think it is healthy to ask questions. I believe you found out that it is not healthy to ask questions when you are a Smith’s Friend and want to stay a Smith’s Friend.
Question #4:
“Good works, like any other kind of sign, do not demonstrate the righteousness of faith. Why would you want me to accept them as evidence of living waters?”
If you agree that they are known by the fruits of the Spirit and this refers to the Holy Spirit and the fruits are mostly outward expressions then certainly we can evaluate people based, not just works, but how they live their life. And good works are one of those things that would naturally come from a person who is filled with the Holy Spirit, or living water. Not righteousness by works but how do you affect and interact with others. It seems to me that if the Holy Spirit is springing forth from you then you would naturally have a positive impact on those around you and this can be seen.
Question #5:
“Regardless, why do YOU think that Lazarus went to Abraham's bosom?”
Like all of Jesus’ parables (an earthly story with a heavenly meaning) this paints a picture of some aspect of heaven. Is there a physical chasm that separates heaven from hell with those on either side in plain view of each other? I don’t think so. But I do think this implies that heaven and hell are real places separate from each other and eternal.
Why do I think Lazarus went to Abraham’s bosom? I think this story is a good illustration that God measures us by what’s in our heart and not the outward appearances or works. The rich man was obviously self-absorbed and unconcerned about the beggar at his gate, while Lazarus had a heart for others. What that was, is not clear from the story, nor is his belief or non-belief about Jesus Christ.
Question #6:
“HOW are sufferings and living water connected, and HOW do they enable us to attain to the resurrection from the dead?”
I don’t believe that sufferings and living water are connected. I do believe that if we believe in Jesus Christ and are baptized in His name we are given the gift of the Holy Spirit and know the truth, then we become a target for the demons. People who know truth are a threat to those who want to control them. Non-believers are no threat to satan so why should he waste his time and energy on them. But I believe there is rejoicing in hell by satan and his demons anytime he can cause a good Christian preacher to fall (or anyone else for that matter).
I believe in spiritual warfare and Christ prepared the apostles to suffer in His name and I think that translates to us as well. We will be targets of satan and can suffer in this world but the good news is that this is temporary and in the end we, as believers, knowing the power of His resurrection, will rejoice in heaven with God and Jesus. How that all works together and takes place, including the resurrection from the dead, can be debated all day by pointy headed professors and theologians but some things are to remain a mystery to us. We can’t know the mind of God. Not even Jesus knows everything (Mt 24:36).
So I guess that if we have the Holy Spirit we can be attacked, and suffer at the hands of satan and his demons. But if we keep the faith to the end we will be resurrected from the dead when the time comes. Where will we be in the meantime is another endless debate which can be interesting but I don’t believe your opinion on that matter is a heaven or hell issue.
Question #7:
“Instead of DOING NOTHING, are eye for an eye and "striking back" the only alternatives that YOU can think of?”
Because I have not been specific about events that have transpired here on this subject you have wrongly assumed that NOTHING has been done. That would be wrong. I am not at liberty to discuss much of these details but I understand your sentiments coming from your perspective.
Question #8:
“How far different is that kind of abuse of authority and power from other kinds of abuse, such as sexual abuse, for example?”
First and most important is that this man has so far, to my knowledge, not committed a criminal act, at least in the case of this girl. Being a cult leader is not a criminal offense in this country. Was what he did immoral? Certainly. Otherwise we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion. However, the school system and others need to be careful about how they interact with this man because of the organization that he represents.
Morality is not a clearly defined legal position and the way most cults operate is like the kid on the playground who hits the other kid first but when the first victim retaliates he is the one to get caught and get in trouble. The first kid, the mean bully that started it, all of the sudden plays the victim role for sympathy. Cults love to get into this position and play up the victim role. This feeds their need to instill fear and sympathy within the group and cause doubts about any case against them from outsiders.
The school’s need for caution is demonstrated by recent events at the Smith’s Friends conference center in Victory NY. SF is planning to build condominiums for members at the North East Christian Conference Center. As a background to this, SF petitioned for tax exempt status as a church organization. This was apparently a hotly debated issue but in the end they won their argument. Now they want to build condominiums on the property and lease them to church members. How convenient is it to have a vacation condo where you don’t have to pay property taxes? This is another hotly debated issue in the city council meetings.
The minutes of the city council meeting from June 13 of this year include discussions on a required zoning permit for building these condos and includes this statement:
“Gary Fenn advised the board that should the permit not be granted the town would be hearing from their lawyer; the meeting hall is a separate issue from the PDD and should therefore not be denied. North East had a similar issue in Connecticut and North East took the town there to court and won the case.”
What kind of Christian morality does this present to their neighbors in Victory when this church organization tries to bully their neighbors and take advantage of them, using the resources of the town and letting everyone else pay for it? (This is a rhetorical question Millard)
Question #8
There was no clear question presented, but it is interesting how you interpreted what I wrote as concern for the teacher’s employment status. I have no concern about that. I was however interested in what you would consider as justifiable action against him.
Question #9:
“If you have an alternate understanding of righteousness, please describe it.”
I believe the Bible is very clear that we cannot earn our salvation by works. I am in your camp of justification by faith. At the same time, as I talked about earlier, your faith is usually evident in your actions.
Question #10:
“What did Jesus mean by saying that HE NEVER knew THEM? In other words, how could Jesus possibly NOT know someone?”
I am not a theologian and like I have said before I don’t pretend to have all the answers. I can only explore these questions like you are.
Did Jesus really mean He didn’t KNOW who they were or did He simply mean that He had no relationship with them and He DID know that they were not working on His behalf but their own (or possibly satan’s).
There are a lot of people who are real big on having a “personal relationship with Jesus”. Maybe this idea comes from this passage in scripture.
This passage also makes me think of the Book of Life. If your name is not in the Book of Life then in the end you aren’t in heaven.
Question #11:
“Seeing that being KNOWN BY HIM seems so crucial, HOW can we be known by him? In other words, what can we do to be known by him, or is there anything that we CAN do?”
In John 17: 1-5, Jesus is praying to God the Father and says:
“Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son may glorify You. For You granted Him authority over all people that He might give eternal life to all those You have given Him.”
In this prayer Jesus is claiming authority, from God, to grant eternal life. At this point He is still on earth and has not yet been crucified but has already been given that authority.
He goes on in the next sentence to define what He means by eternal life: “Now this is eternal life: that they know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.”
Several times in scripture Jesus talks about how to gain eternal life in heaven and it is always about what you BELIEVE about Him. I’m not familiar with any scripture where Jesus says you have to perform any physical function to gain eternal life. It is always about what you believe. Here He uses the term “that they KNOW You, the only true God”. This is all about: do you KNOW who God is.
But James says “Even the demons believe that—and shudder”. So there must be more.
I may know a lot of things but if I don’t USE that knowledge to DO something then what good is it? God may have given me the knowledge to cure cancer but if I never do anything with it then what good is it. So in this context, what can we DO to be known by Him? One possible answer to this is to use those gifts that God has given you and your knowledge of Him to point others to the one true God. To glorify Him.
For some people this is mission work in other countries. For others it may be teaching little kids in Sunday school. For some it may be starting a company and providing jobs in the community. I don’t think there is one single answer to that question.
But, as a high school teacher, moving a young female student into your home and actively working to separate her from her friends and family and using her as a free nanny for your children does NOT qualify!
I like the last sentence in this passage, verse 5: “And now, Father, glorify Me in Your presence with the glory I had with You before the world began.”
For those people that claim that Jesus was a man like the rest of us. That He was no different, I think this blows that whole idea out of the water because Jesus is claiming to exist “before the world began”. It is clear that He was sent by God, that He was with God, and that He had the same “glory” as God before this universe existed.
I think that is my longest post yet! I hope I responded to all of you questions, I intended to.
Harold -
I've been busy, but wanted to thank you for your posts. I won't be able to spend much time responding. Got myself involved and free time is at a minimum these days. Even so, I want you to know I read your posts and appreciate your thoughts and that you put that kind of effort into a response. Thank you.
At this point, if anything has changed in my views, I'm more convinced of the problems with Christianity today, not less. For me, the question about living waters isn't theological or theoretical. Beside the fact that, so far, no one I've talked to claims to experience the like, their obvious indifference disturbs me. When people point to experiences that pitifully approximate a shadow of the power of God implied by Jesus' metaphor, claiming that those are examples or evidence of living waters, it doesn't comfort or convince me. Understanding the metaphor is not the same as experiencing its reality. Such non-responses only convince me that the people who give them are blind and deaf while saying that they see and hear. At the least, giving non-responses shows that they aren't interested in getting more than they already have.
Responding to my question, which asked WHERE living waters are and WHO experiences them, by requiring me to describe WHAT I mean by "living waters" only proves the blindness and deafness of those who make the requirement. If you were looking for real love and asked me where to find it and who experiences it, do you think I'd ask you define and describe love? If we have eyes to see and ears to hear anything at all of love or the power of God, we'll know living waters when we see and hear them. So far, I see and hear precious little of them from me or anyone else, but I see and hear plenty of excuses for the lack of them.
The state of Christianity, and for that matter the state of the world, is deplorable, dismal, and utterly unacceptable. When abuses rise to the levels we see now, condoning, justifying, or defending the state of affairs that enabled abuse to proliferate is criminal and insane. I refuse to condone this situation. I call upon everyone who names Jesus' name to refuse to condone it, too.
In contrast, Christians condone the state of the world today along with their powerlessness to change it, in spite of their advertising preached weekly from the pulpits. At the least hypocritical end of the scale, Christians display the impotence of their faith through resignation and inaction. At the fascist end of the scale, Christians decry as "evil" everything that opposes their "righteous" programs, and then try to eradicate that "evil" not by godly means, but by GODLESS means: politics, law enforcement, and military force. If they possess the power of God that is capable of destroying evil strongholds, why do they resort to manipulation, trickery, and brute force just like the atheists and "godless" people they decry? They resort to godless means, naming God's name all the while, because those means are MORE powerful than anything else they have at their disposal.
Right and left, Christians preach the power of God with words, but deny God's power in every way that matters. Paul had something to say about that. "...holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these." 1 Tim. 3:5
I am determined to find and live in God's power and to encourage others to do the same. Shame on anyone, including me, who makes excuses for the shit hole we currently live in. Shame on anyone, including me, who remains indifferent to the shit or, God forbid, defends it. Shame on anyone, including me, who settles for substitutes, which in the old days were called idols and those who bowed down to them, idolaters. We should rather die instead.
PS. If their "Christianity" is not serious enough to die for, "Christians" are hypocrites, play-acting for the sake of some kind of earthly, worldly gain. Whatever they get here as a result will be their reward in full, and it will stay here when they go. Then, MANY will say, "Lord, Lord..."
Millard said:
“Responding to my question, which asked WHERE living waters are and WHO experiences them, by requiring me to describe WHAT I mean by "living waters" only proves the blindness and deafness of those who make the requirement.”
When someone asks a question like “where living waters are”, it is reasonable and, I believe, necessary to ask them to define “living waters” because you need to try and determine what question they are really asking. It isn’t always clear because people can use the same terminology to describe different things. There is a joke about a little boy asking his father “where did I come from”. His father went into great detail about the “birds and bees” subject. Afterwards the little boy said “But Billy says he is from Cleveland”.
So asking what you mean by “living waters” doesn’t prove anything about me.
Millard said:
“If we have eyes to see and ears to hear anything at all of love or the power of God, we'll know living waters when we see and hear them. So far, I see and hear precious little of them from me or anyone else, but I see and hear plenty of excuses for the lack of them.”
Maybe you’re not looking in the right place. I agree with you that in most churches in this country it is hard to see anything that would resemble what you are looking for, but I also don’t agree that “Christians condone the state of the world today”. That is not the message I hear from most pulpits. If that is what you hear then maybe you should look for a different church.
I have also observed that you include yourself in your criticisms. But if you can’t live up to your own expectations, why do you expect everyone else to. You hear plenty of excuses for the lack of living water…OK…so what’s your excuse?
“How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?” Mat 7:4
Millard said:
“If they possess the power of God that is capable of destroying evil strongholds, why do they resort to manipulation, trickery, and brute force just like the atheists and "godless" people they decry?”
I agree that manipulation, trickery, and brute force are the tools of evil people whose selfish desires are not in line with God’s will. The tools of righteousness are truth and love; there are no laws against these.
But I have a problem with the idea that Christians “possess the power of God”. God isn’t a genie in a bottle that we can call out whenever our selfish desires want to make something happen. God will do what God wants to. We should rather try to understand and put ourselves under God’s will. That isn’t necessarily easy. It can take great patience and prayer trying to recognize what God’s will is for us and some may perceive that as impotence of faith and inaction.
What is His will for me? I don’t really know for sure. I don’t hear audibly from God. I do believe that He opens doors where He wants me to go and that in these instances the choices I need to make are pretty clear.
What is God’s will for you? That is an area that only God knows. This is where most cult leaders tread. They claim to know what God’s will is for you and if you don’t follow their instructions you are outside of God’s will. This is an evil lie. Nobody but God knows His will for you.
On the other hand, the Bible doesn’t paint a picture where God’s people just sit around and wait for Him to do all the work. God could do that for sure. But He usually requires some action on the part of His people to achieve His goals for them. God was active in the Israelite occupation of the Promised Land. But it required an army that followed God’s instructions.
Was it necessary for the United States to enter WWII? Was that the instruction from God? We could debate that all day long but, in the end, Hitler was an evil guy, one of the most successful cult leaders to date and the world is better off without him. You could say the same thing about Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qaddafi or ultimately Mohammed.
Does that make us righteous? I don’t believe that. But I do believe it is necessary to field an army for the defense and protection of our freedoms and that is in line with God’s examples throughout scripture.
Please don’t take my comments as making excuses for or defending the state of all Christianity today. I agree with much of your sentiments and I encourage you to keep trying to find and live in God’s power. I hope you find what you are looking for. For me, it isn’t here on this earth.
To Harold:
Sorry for such a slow response. I've been focused elsewhere for a while.
I want to apologize for getting a bit personal about the definition thing. I was frustrated. Living waters have to AT LEAST resemble the power of the early church, some of which we see in Acts. But I'm not primarily interested in amazing outward displays. I'm interested in the inner power that corresponds to that external power. I'm interested in the power that will actually transform our thinking, feeling, our very natures.
Paul writes about sanctification and transformation in the inner man. Peter says we can partake of divine nature. Not glimpse it. Not experience it once in a while, or even every Sunday and Wednesday evening. PARTAKE OF NEW, DIVINE NATURE. Become different inwardly. Be transformed. BECOME like Jesus, not just act like Jesus. If we have to ask, "What would Jesus do?" it shows that we don't HAVE the mind of Christ. But Paul wrote that we do, or at least those who find real power do.
You mentioned my criticism. I criticize defense of the status quo pretty much wherever I find it, not just on spiritual matters. The current state of things everywhere and in practically every way is deplorable. I quip that I'd be a conservative if I found much worth conserving. Those who defend this mess should be ashamed of themselves. Those who want to cocoon in their little pockets of temporary affluence and ignore everything else going on around them should pay attention to James:
"Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries which are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments have become moth-eaten. Your gold and your silver have rusted; and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh like fire. It is in the last days that you have stored up your treasure! Behold, the pay of the laborers who mowed your fields, and which has been withheld by you, cries out against you; and the outcry of those who did the harvesting has reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. You have lived luxuriously on the earth and led a life of wanton pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. You have condemned and put to death the righteous man; he does not resist you."
That's addressed to people in the time of the New Covenant. They'd better enjoy it while they've got it.
As far as criticizing myself and others for lack of "living waters" or lack of any other aspect of the power of God, we deserve it. I'm 57 years old. I should have figured it out by now. Others who claim to have figured things out should have more to show for it than mega-congregations and 7-, 8-, or 9-digit church budgets. (Or has the Catholic Church broken the billion dollar per annum mark already?)
tbc...
(...cont'd)
You wrote, "But if you can’t live up to your own expectations, why do you expect everyone else to. You hear plenty of excuses for the lack of living water…OK…so what’s your excuse?"
You misunderstand me if you think I'm expecting others to live up to expectations I can't live up to myself. Sure, I'd LOVE IT if I could find people who understood and experience the power I long for! I keep asking where such people are. I'm frustrated with the lack of information about how to live a powerful life. I'm at a loss.
On the other hand, given that we all seem to be in pretty much the same boat, I'm critical and pretty much fed up with people whitewashing the problem, and especially with the indifference of most Christians. Making out that Christianity today is anything like Jesus and the early church experienced is baloney. Most Christians would admit that we don't nearly approach the kind of life they experienced in Acts. Why not? Why, after over 2,000 years of opportunity, don't we INSTEAD EXPERIENCE FAR MORE??? Why hasn't there been development, improvement? Why is an Acts experience still an ideal, an aspiration? Why aren't we weeping and gnashing our teeth at thousands of years of FAILURE of the Christian Church instead of arguing interminably about its superiority? If it were clearly superior, POWER would put an end to the arguments. No power there, though, so instead they spend gazillions on missions, apologetics, and PR.
Why aren't we experiencing power? Probably because we IN TRUTH feel we are "rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing," and we don't know that we are "wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked." I'm open to other explanations if you have any.
And please, Harold, don't patronize me or belittle my concerns by quips to the effect that I've been looking in all the wrong places. I'd like to think better of you than that.
Like I said, show me where to look. Tell me where I can find the right places. I'll go there. But I can tell you right now that if they are located under the roofs of millions-plus-dollar structures on acres of prime real estate, I won't find it there.
Harold, Sophie, and anyone else interested...
Harold has mentioned a couple of times that this blog is special-purpose, and much of our discussions lately have been off-topic. I don't have much more to say about SF at this time, but I love discussing spiritual and Biblical issues.
I started a blog specifically for that purpose: http://tochristians.wordpress.com/
I hope anyone interested in finding a way to experience the life written about in the New Testament will join us there and help us figure it out.
My sister and I, both former members of SF, just read the comments here. We were struck by the ring of truth many of the personal experiences shared had.
We still have contact with many people who are in "The Church", and some of them remain good friends. In every group can be found "bad eggs" or people who discriminate against other people based on what they believe to be a more enlightened understanding of how to live (according to scripture or statements from leaders).
We (my sister and I) believe that to label the entire organization SF a cult is a dangerous thing to do. The reason we feel this way is that not everyone involved with SF behaves the same way or believes the same things. We personally have experienced pain and suffering at the hands of many misguided SF members, but we choose not to angrily label the whole group destructive or misguided. We do not have enough evidence to say with one hundred percent confidence that SF is a cult or that it is not. It is best (healthiest, we think)to work through the hurt and bitterness and use our experiences to create a more meaningful and peaceful life for ourselves. Thank you so much for making this available. It was nice to see that there are others who have experienced SF in ways similar to ours (The Truth, specifically)
SharknMiA its very good you give your opinion on SF, or brunstad church whatever people call them these days, I agree 100% with what your saying, I believe that lots of good people are in that church so we cant put them all in the same boat. But its sad that some of them use people for their own good. I had so much trust in certain people from that church that I have told them to many thing about my own life, and it turned againts me. It was use in court againts me, and it should have been helping me to become a better person, the bible says to confesse our sin to one another, thats what I have done but since most people from that church believe in victory over sin.They think that when we have a sinfull life we are bad people, but most people from that church did not have parents that was not their for them and and a horrible childhood.
When they say they are GOD only church, and they cant even help people that arent born in their church I think something is wrong, from what I have seen , its like 90% of people in that church was born and raise in the church, the 10% they came from outside the church and most of them dont stay in the church cause they feel out of place.
Then they make those people feel like they arent worth anything, thats how I felt, I never seen a church with so much ego, many time I was with a few of the friends, younger one, and they would see bum on the street and laught at them, I wonder what GOD think about that. most bum on the street was abuse as children and beaten with no parents, they did not have the chance like most people in the church.
My kids are still going to brunstad church, I am ok with that cause i know some people are taking care of them, but one thing I will make sure that my kids does not think they are better then other people ouside the church. And dont laught at others , I want my kids to understand that most people that are living a hard life today , its not most of them wanted but cause they had no one to show them the way.
I see a big diferent from that church now then how it was 15 years ago, now they change certain ways cause they know they would lose many young people in the church, they are becoming the church that they always preach againts. But GOD see all things and he will be the one to judge the people in that church. Its worst to be in the church and preach about victory againts sin when yourself is a sinner. but thats the only thing people learn in the church, as long your life looks good thats all that matters, I could have keep going there and make it like I had a happy familly but it was all a lie, so I rather not live with 2 faces like lots of them do.
Millard; Like I said, for me it isn’t here on this earth.
SharknMiA; Thanks for your input. I agree with your comment that it is dangerous to label the entire group based on the behaviors of a few. However, it is also apparent that your experience is not unusual within the entire group worldwide either. Quite a few people have spoken out on this blog. How many people like you are reading this blog but are reluctant to speak up. And how many does it take to speak out before people should get concerned. There were many people who were asking those same questions in 1978 about The People’s Temple in Guyana while 990 people died.
One of the behaviors present in coercive groups is the feeling instilled by the leadership that if you are unhappy then it is because YOU have failed to get it. EVERYONE else is happy and content. It is YOUR fault that you have these guilt feelings or desires. Some groups will try to define those feelings as satanic. Maybe those are feelings are the Holy Spirit. How do you know?
There is a common thread of this kind of coercion in most of the comments from ex-Smith’s Friends on this blog. There are so many of these behavior traits existing from many different members that the old saying “where there is smoke there must be fire” comes to mind.
I want to encourage you to continue working through the hurt and bitterness because I believe that you have been abused by this church. Cult or not. The psychology at work is the same and most people in your situation benefit from at least some counseling. But be careful. Not all counselors know how to deal with these kinds of issues. Try reading some of Steve Hassan’s books or Steve Arterburn’s ‘More Jesus Less Religion’.
Barloute; If I understand your comments, you were not born into the church so you were treated differently than those who are raised in the church? If your children are being raised in the church, why do you think that you have any influence in what they believe about others, or about you for that matter?
Are you willing to share which fellowship you were a member of?
I was not born in that church I use to go to pentocostal church then I have met that church. But was still 10 hours of drive from that church, then I got maried in the pentocostal church, but I put myself in trouble cause I knew I should not get maried even the pastor wanted to call it off, and me too but I did not know how to say no. Anyway a few years ago I had to quite my job, lose my house , went bankrupt to move closer to that fellowship. I still not againts the whole church but I am very confuse cause I was telling some of the people in that church that I should get a divorce before I end up with many kids like most of the friends in that church but a few people in the church was telling me to trust in GOD for my mariage and that divorce is not GOD wills. So I was very confuse cause my heart was telling me to get a divorce but my mind was telling me to follow some of the people in the church. I did not have enuff confidence in myself to do what was right. Now with 4 kids I am divorce and I can only see them 2 hours every 2 weeks. And most people from that church disapear since they see my situation, One of the brother in the church told me often years ago, that I was like is brother and he would always be there for me. Now the past 3 years I never hear from him , he was the first one to try to help me and the first one to run away after he sees the situation I am in. I have made a group on face book for trying to get more time with my kids , I need lots of supports , the group is call a fathers love, is anyone on here want to support just ask to inter the group. thanks
Harold:
Yeah, I just recently realized how that works and why the attitude is so widespread among Churchians.
It's the perfect excuse for callous, pathetic neglect. We can't do anything now. Jesus will clean up our mess when he returns. It's like we expect him and the Father to enable our juvenile, narcissistic irresponsibility. No wonder: it's the flip side to the "be fleeced now, get rewarded later" logic on which Churchianity was built.
There will be huge surprises when Jesus comes back, directly proportional to the degree that people expect things to be different then. We take into heaven what we got out of this life, no more, no less.
PS. I really liked your advice to SharknMiA. You're right on about the coercion. Hassan's book helped me a lot when I got out of SF.
The psychology is very similar to what goes on in any one-on-one abusive relationship. Same bullying tactics, same fear/reward cycles that lock you in.
Captive Hearts, Captive Minds : Freedom and Recovery from Cults and Other Abusive Relationships (http://www.amazon.com/Captive-Hearts-Minds-Recovery-Relationships/dp/0897931440) and Carol Giambalvo's articles were a big help, too.
SharknMiA and Barloute: Thank you for sharing a little of your experience with SF. I’m sorry you’ve been hurt by some in this group. Obviously, you’re not alone.
I agree that it’s not a good idea to judge one person by another person’s behaviors, beliefs, or actions. And, I also believe that there may be some good people involved with SF who do not behave in the same way or believe all the same things so we shouldn’t ‘put them all the same boat’.
I do believe that many of the behaviors and actions of SF members observed worldwide have led to questions concerning their beliefs and their interpretation and understanding of scripture. Some writings and teachings of SF leadership don’t line up with scripture and the results of that misguided and twisted teaching can be seen in the actions of its members. That’s one reason it is important to read and study the scriptures for yourself, learn the context, historical settings, time periods, the culture, correct word origin and usage and understand what was really being taught rather than just take what your ‘church’ leaders tell you the scripture means. Doesn’t SF have a contest for their youth which involves memorization of their church literature (written by SF leaders) rather than memorization of the Bible? That is another indication that SF leaders believe their SF interpretation of scripture is more important than the Bible itself.
For me, this group in Owasso began appearing cult-like when they moved this young college girl out of the dorm (where her own family had just helped move her into) and into their house (behind her parents’ backs). Her parents received a call from a friend of their daughter concerned about her whereabouts. As any concerned parent who loves their child (regardless of age) would, they began searching for their missing daughter. They found her at this school teacher’s home where she continued to reside. After this teacher moved her into his home, her car was hidden so hopefully no one would find out she lived with them. Then SUDDENLY and without cause she became hateful to and fearful of her own family, cut off ties with them, not calling or coming home for weekends, holiday breaks, or family vacations. She also cut off ties with her oldest and closest friends and gave up all her own interests and hobbies. What was witnessed were abnormal behaviors that came from a very normal girl who once had very close relationships within her own family, was very social and active, suddenly only to be seen doing things with this man, his family, or those associated with SF. She lived with this teacher and his family, spending holiday breaks with them, vacations with them, working with them, and attending ‘church’ meetings with them. This girl’s family has been lied to, lied about, threatened, and assaulted by this SF family. These are just a few non-Christian tactics that have been used to separate, sever emotional ties, isolate, intimidate, coerce, and manipulate in order to achieve a goal. These are all common cult tactics.
Most young college students begin attending college and become involved in campus life, meeting people and making new friends at university. Many college students who are Christian would normally attend a church that is different from their parents because they are residing in a new community. But they still stay emotionally connected to their own family, calling them, going home for weekends, spending holidays and vacations with them, keep at least some of their old friends, and keep their family involved in their life. Becoming an independent young adult doesn’t happen overnight, but rather GRADUALLY and over time, but they still stay emotionally connected to family members. That’s not what happened with this girl.
I think it is important for people to understand that this teacher/SF leader has no problem with intentionally severing ties between family members. He deliberately physically separated this student, from her own family, the very ones who brought her into this world, invested in her, the family that God chose for her to be a part of, and began eroding emotional ties by using lies, distortions, and fabrications. Because she lived with him and his family, they had constant influence with whom and how she spent her time. They were the main, if not sole, influence in her life. That is what cults do-they take over virtually every aspect of a person’s life, changing their thinking, their interests, their behavior, their associations, their beliefs, their activities.
SF teaches that they are ‘The Church’ and those who don’t belong to SF are ‘the harlot’. This is divisive and un-Christlike teaching. I believe it is this type of teaching that causes the arrogance, fear, hate, and divisive behaviors we see among this group. I agree there may be good people in SF, but they have been misguided in their teaching from scripture taken out of context and misinterpreted. It not only hurts them, but also their relationships with those outside of SF.
Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, the Life and no one comes to the Father but through Him. He loved people, ministered to people, told the truth, and did not shun others who were misguided like Nicodemus or sinners like Zacchaeus and the Samaritan woman at the well. He came as a propitiation for our sin, but He also came to teach the world what love is, to demonstrate it, and to call sinners to repentance. As Christians, we are called to love others as Christ loves us. Love doesn’t intentionally separate family and friends.
It may be dangerous to label the whole SF group a cult although their teachings and beliefs line up with cult-like behavior. Just as it may not be a good idea to label the whole SF a cult, I believe it is not a good idea to label everyone who is not part of SF a ‘harlot’, which is what they do. It is written in their publications, believed and taught by their leadership. If they don’t want to be thought of and labeled a cult, perhaps they should stop behaving like one.
Hello, Sophie, I am just curious to know if you ever been to that brunstad church, and how do you know all those things about that church. thanks
Barloute, I have had some experience with cult groups (other than SF) and their victims. Reading this blog alone reveals that this is not an isolated event. And due to that, I believe from everything I’ve seen, heard, and read that the division, shunning, separation, lying, hate, arrogance, fear, manipulation, coercion, avoidance tactics all stem from teachings of this group and others like them.
Millard, let’s back up just a little. You are talking about looking for “how to live a powerful life”, and “why aren’t we experiencing power”. You said “show me where to look”.
My response is that, for me, it isn’t here on this earth. I’m not trying to justify a lifestyle that says live free and do what you want because “Jesus will clean up our mess when he returns.” That not my point at all.
You seem to be like Naaman (2 Kings 5) who went to see Elisha the prophet to be healed from leprosy. When Elisha told him to go dip in the Jordan River seven times, he was offended because he expected some great miracle from God, not some simple instruction to go dip in the local creek. That was just too simple.
You want to know where the real power is? It is Jesus, the Christ, not any man or man-made thing on this earth. In my opinion, you are looking for something else here and are disappointed, and my response is…duh, no kidding.
If you have a real desire for that kind of power, the real power that comes from God, maybe you are one of many throughout history who God thumbed His nose at. God rebuked many men like King Nebuchadnezzar who sought out and reveled in the desire for power, godlike power.
The kind of men that God chose to walk with were exactly the opposite. Guys like Moses, who didn’t want it. Moses argued with God and said please pick somebody else. Joseph, David, Gideon, Jonah are others that come to mind that weren’t looking for a powerful life but God had a different plan.
Are you looking for instructions on “how to live a powerful life”? Maybe you are looking with the wrong motive.
Let me ask another question. Do you believe the Bible is the word of God? Or do you believe the scriptures are just folk tales used by mainstream churches to manipulate the poor unenlightened people of this world?
Harold:
You wrote, "My response is that, for me, it [power] isn’t here on this earth. "
You wrote, "You want to know where the real power is? It is Jesus, the Christ, not any man or man-made thing on this earth. In my opinion, you are looking for something else here and are disappointed, and my response is…duh, no kidding."
Classic excluded middle fallacy: Jesus Christ and his power which arent "here on this earth" vs. "man or man-made thing[s] on this earth."
What about the part you DIDN'T mention: Jesus Christ in the flesh? In other words, the power of God in Christ HERE AND NOW IN SPACE AND TIME ACTIVE THROUGH HUMAN BEINGS, CHANGING THINGS HERE ON THIS EARTH! Why avoid mentioning THAT? "In the flesh" means EXACTLY "here on this earth." It DOES NOT mean "NOT here on this earth."
I both agree and disagree with you.
I agree that, for the most part, Christ's power is not on this earth. I see very little of it anywhere: very little joy, very little peace, very little love. I see lots of people trying to behave in joyful, peaceful, loving ways WITHOUT THE POWER TO DO SO.
But I disagree with you when you dismiss the possibility that real power could be here and should be here on this earth, relegating it to...
Oh! That's right! You never said where you relegated it to. In Jesus Christ, but where? Not here on this earth, anyway. Presumably in "heaven" or the "afterlife" or something like that?
If real power:
1. is not here on this earth
2. you aren't looking for it here on this earth
3. you don't mention where you expect it to show up or even IF you expect it to show up
then you beg the question: Do you EVER expect to experience power at all? You have a lot to say that condones and even justifies the lack of power here on this earth. Maybe you're playing for the wrong team.
As a matter of fact, if I'm offended, it's not like Naaman was. You actually misapplied the story, anyway. The situation that offends me has nothing to do with following simple instructions. I'd love to get simple instructions.
That's exactly what Churchians DON'T have. Their instructions (and yours apparently) tell us to be satisfied with NO power here on this earth. It's all in Christ. God sees me through Christ. I have everything "in Jesus" which, translated, means I don't experience it here at all.
To apply the story of Naaman to me and what I'm offended about, Elisha's messenger would have told Naaman to dip in the Jordan seven times, come out with his leprosy intact, and still be happy that he had his healing "in God" or "in heaven" or "in Jesus" (except Jesus didn't apply then) instead of IN HIS FLESH.
tbc...
(...cont'd)
Someone posted an interesting Bonhoeffer quote today. Your line of thinking reminds me of it:
“The Christian is the man who no longer seeks his salvation, his deliverance, his justification in himself, but in Jesus Christ alone. He knows that God’s Word in Jesus Christ pronounces him guilty, even when he does not feel his guilt, and God’s Word in Jesus Christ pronounces him not guilty and righteous, even when he does not feel righteous at all. The Christian no longer lives of himself, by his own claims and his own justification, but by God’s claims and God’s justification. He lives wholly by God’s Word pronounced upon him.”
How accurate that quote is I don't know, but its accuracy isn't relevant. It articulates what a lot of Churchians believe. I think you would find it agreeable. So, Bonhoeffer apparently felt enough disconnection from a vibrant experience of his faith to write that crap. It sounds like he was covering a lack of power with a declaration of dead faith.
As a matter of fact, over the last 3-4 months, things have been changing for me. I am starting to experience the power I've been looking for. Sorry to disappoint you Harold, but there IS power to be had here on this earth. I was sure that there was, because otherwise Jesus was full of shit, and I was sure that he wasn't full of shit. If faith can move mountains and nothing will be impossible to us if we believe, what's up with your defense of powerlessness "here on this earth?" You are missing out, man.
Your comments do help to clarify something that I've been thinking about for several months:
1 John Chapter 4
1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; 3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.
2 John Chapter 1
7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
Not just Jesus in the flesh, but Jesus Christ in the flesh. Not just Christ in heaven, but Jesus Christ in the flesh.
Relegating Jesus Christ's power to places unknown off of this earth and out of this world is in keeping with the spirit of antichrist. Jesus Christ's power IS now in his body, which must include everyone who experiences the power of Christ IN THE FLESH, not those who do no more than label themselves as his followers and act like "good" people. Jesus warned that there would be plenty of posers like that, too. He said they would even do signs and wonders, but to not be deceived by them. Apparently, you don't even have enough power to qualify for THAT!
Finally, I gotta say something about you getting personal. You even engaged in a favorite Smith's Friends tactic: insinuating fault or malintent in the motivations of someone you find objectionable. I bet you thought that you didn't have the CULTIST in you! But you just demonstrated that you do.
Besides being low, unfair, and uninformed, (I've written clearly why I am looking for and asking about power, but you insist on ignoring it,) it's very much an "anti-" attitude. Seeing as how I'm advocating Jesus Christ and his power here and now in the flesh, your attitude is definitely anti-Christ, according to John, as written in the Bible, God's Word, which you claim to believe.
tbc...
(...cont'd)
As to your question "Do you believe the Bible is the word of God?" the answer is "Yes," but I'm sure that you don't mean the same thing as I do by the term "the word of God." I am not a Bible cultist. The Bible is not a Paper Pope. The "canon" (my God, the terms that Churchians come up with!) is not closed. God speaks his word today, all the time, to anyone who will listen, including me, and to everyone who won't listen, too, even those who will only listen to him when his word comes through a collection of texts that was petrified in the 4th century by a bunch of guys they know almost nothing about.
I'm sure God speaks to you, too, Harold, but it must be hard when you probably reject anything he says to you that doesn't jive with YOUR PREFERRED INTERPRETATION of canonized text. There's a great Jewish story about a bunch of rabbis who refused to listen to God when he spoke to them audibly, because what he said "didn't agree with the Torah." Scripture cults are still cults.
The word of God is everywhere: in the Quran, the Apocrypha, the sayings of Confucious, the newspaper, e-zines, Wikipedia, YouTube, TV shows, movies, theater, and pretty much everywhere that you can find truth, even the mouths of children and street-dwelling addicts and alcoholics. Some of them have truth like you've probably never heard. I didn't mention the Talmud or the Pearl of Great Price or the Bhagavad Gītā or the Buddhavacana, for example, because I haven't yet read them, so I would only be speaking from ignorance on them, but I'm sure I'll find plenty of God's word there, too, when I get around to them.
You seem to live in a deathly quiet, powerless world, Harold. You don't need to. I'm starting to have fun. I hope the same for you.
Millard, I both agree and disagree with you and think this is an interesting discussion. But we are getting a little off topic for this blog. I have tried to avoid the theological discussions in the past on this blog because I believe that cults are not defined by their theology but by their behavior. In the case of religious cults it is hard to avoid some theological topics and I am guilty of stepping off topic as well.
I have read some of your blog and I would like to continue this discussion there if that is OK with you. But I would also like to respond to part of your post that I believe is relevant. You said:
“Finally, I gotta say something about you getting personal. You even engaged in a favorite Smith's Friends tactic: insinuating fault or malintent in the motivations of someone you find objectionable. I bet you thought that you didn't have the CULTIST in you! But you just demonstrated that you do.”
I do NOT find you objectionable. I apologize if you got that impression. I simply wanted to present the idea that if you are looking for something spiritual from God and you are not finding it, maybe you have wrong motives. That is not me passing judgment on you. That is me trying to present something to think about. I cannot know your motives. We all need to check our motives when we deal with other people because we ALL have those CULTIST tendencies in us, including you. And that is my next point.
I agree that it is a common tactic of groups like SF to insinuate faults in others who disagree with them or ask questions. Ref Robert Lifton, Doctrine Over Person; “If one questions the beliefs of the group or the leaders of the group, one is made to feel that there is something inherently wrong with them to even question -- it is always ‘turned around’ on them and the questioner/criticizer is questioned rather than the questions answered directly”
Groups like SF use those tactics to coerce people to behave in a way that benefits them. You paint me with that broad brush and I disagree with that. I have nothing to gain from what you believe or don’t believe.
We all have the capacity to be selfish and manipulate others. The same manipulation tactics used by cults is all around us. Everywhere. You can find it in school classrooms, at work, television advertisements, political groups, marriages, and parents. It is interesting how the news media and politicians (both sides) try to spin things to support their cause. Cults have no corner on the market when it comes to the art of persuasion, but I believe a big part of the danger and evilness of cult groups comes down to the intensity and motives involved.
Parents may use persuasive means to get their children to clean their room, or take out the trash, or other chores, or to stay out of trouble. But the motive of good parents is not selfishness, or control for the sake of control, but out of love and protection for their children and to teach life skills. Children benefit from good parents who discipline, teach, and protect with the right motives.
Cult leaders use persuasion, often the same as parents, only they twist it and use it against the victims. This is so easy to do with young teenagers because they are at that stage where they want to be independent. That is a transition point that is hard for both teens and parents. A good cult leader can start planting ideas that the parents are controlling and demanding and that he can offer real freedom. As soon as teenagers turn 18 he can start with the idea that they are adults now and can do whatever they want. They don’t have to listen to their parents any more. Most teenagers eat this up like candy. Even if they have a good relationship with their parents it is easy to get teenagers to take this bait.
The real truth is that the cult leader is beginning to put his victim into a psychological box. His offer for freedom is only valid as long as they stay in his little box. You can do anything you want as long as you stay inside the box. It can feel so good in the little box. He offers physical and spiritual highs that you can’t get in most other places, as long as you stay in his box. And a good cult leader is very skilled at making each person think that they are special and his best friend while he picks their pocket.
Some cults use physical means to keep you in the box. With some it is strictly psychological. Some use both. But the end result is the same; separation from everything and everybody who really cares about you. The only information allowed is from the cult. The only real relationship you are allowed to have is with those inside the box.
My experience in talking with people who have come out of groups like this is that they still have a desire for that emotional high that was inside the box. They know that they were manipulated. They understand the coercion. But they are like a drug addict when it comes to the emotional high, and they have a hard time finding it outside of high intensity coercive groups.
Let’s take a look at the motives of this school teacher and SF leader who manipulates a young female student and persuades her to move into his home and take his children to school, pick them up from school, tutor them, babysit, all in the name of “church work”. What is the motive behind this on his part? What did SHE benefit from this?
When she married his son and worked many hours while she is going to school, who benefits? She had a full scholarship, including tuition, room and board with meal plan. She also had parents and family able and willing to help with anything she needed. She had no economic reason to work. Again, who benefits? He does.
Later, when she and his son both bought new cars and he got her previous car (the one her grandfather bought for her) so his children could have a car to drive when they turned 16, who benefitted from this? She now has new car payments while he got a free car for his children to drive. Her grandfather had other grandchildren who could have used that car but who ultimately benefitted from it? He (the teacher) did and he obviously doesn’t care about anybody else.
So if you examine the behaviors of this group, they fall in line with just about every cult group out there. The manipulation tactics and motives of this SF leader and school teacher are very clear.
Most people think of cults as some weird and wacky group who lives on an isolated compound out in the middle of nowhere. But that is not always the case. In fact, most cults live very innocuous lives in our communities and most people don’t recognize them for what they are. Our society has a “live and let live” attitude so as long as they don’t get caught doing anything bizarre then they can stay underneath the radar.
When this SF leader moved this girl into his home, that was extreme and it attracted the attention of those in this community who know this girl and her family and ultimately defines what he and Smith’s Friends are.
By the way, have you read about the case in Modesto California, where the high school girl Jordan Powers moved in with her 41 year old teacher James Hooker? This story has been in the news recently because of what our society considers inappropriate behavior. Teachers are paid by the taxpayers and work for the community. They should be people of integrity and able to be trusted by the parents. After all it is the taxpayers (including parents) who pay their salary. When they do things like have an eighteen year old student move in with them and cause division between the student and her own family, it draws negative attention from the public. On Bill O’Reilly’s show ‘The Factor’, Megan Kelly used words like took advantage of, abusive, groomed, brainwashed, and wooing to describe what appears that the teacher did to this young girl. He used his position as a teacher inappropriately for his own purposes and violated his fiduciary responsibility to the parents. In this Modesto case, the teacher is benefitting sexually from this young student and the result is a public outrage because people see a young naïve girl being taken advantage of by someone more than twice her age.
Hey Harold! Now that's more like it! I've been enjoying our discussions. Maybe I read into your last post a bit. It didn't seem like the you I've gotten to know in this forum.
Yes, please, let's take our discussion over to http://tochristians.wordpress.com/
I thought your understanding of cult dynamics was right on. Yes, we ALL have the cultist in us. I believe it's what the Bible refers to as "idolatry," but in modern terminology closely resembles the models of addiction and the abusive relationship. Cult leaders are pushers, Big Brothers (ala Orwell's 1984), and pimps, and their followers are addicts, patriot fanatics, and whores. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I was one, so I have a voice and the right to say what it's like. It's a comment on the PERSPECTIVES of the victims, not a judgment on the people who get victimized. Before they can extract themselves, they have to change their perspectives, so that they can actually see a way out for themselves. That's where we could help.
Interestingly, "cults" aren't the only places where cultism runs rampant to one degree or another. You touched on this in your post. It's everywhere that abusers are allowed to operate, not just religious contexts. Check out http://www.nakedpastor.com/2012/03/05/exit-interview. Here's a guy who left the ministry a couple of years ago, "graffiti artist on the walls of the church." His blog followers tell similar stories of alienation and abuse from all kinds of churches. Cultic dynamics are in the mainstream, not just the fringes.
I hadn't heard about the Modesto case. Not to minimize it, but this stuff goes on everywhere. The surprise is not that it happens, but that it happens with so little notice or alarm--let alone OUTRAGE--on the part of those nearby who could intervene. What's worse are the patterns of denial and cover-up that are INVARIABLY the initial reactions of THOSE VERY SAME PEOPLE. That's why I pounded on my questions about what was done in Owasso. The response I got was: nothing. Not only that, but I got pushback that doing something about it is inadvisable, with a hint of moralism against returning evil for evil thrown in. What that tells me is that we SUCK at dealing with evil people and evil behavior, since we can't come up with anything better than "leaving it to God." Abusers and predators LOVE that kind of "logic." THEY are who we learned it from.
I'm exploring what Paul wrote that gets labeled "spiritual warfare." I don't subscribe to WOOOoooOOOHHH spiritism or exorcism and the like, though I don't preclude them either--just not interested in that angle. Paul wrote about destroying fortresses and speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God. Sounds a lot the dynamics that drive abusive relationships.
Just think of being able to stop abusers, to destroy their stongholds and their strangleholds on their victims! Just think of the sparks of life and dignity that ignite in prisoners of abusive situations when they realize that they can escape and be safe! And just think of the sudden “Oh shit!” dawn of recognition in an abusers’ eyes when he realizes that the jig is up! I believe THAT’S what Paul was talking about. I’m trying to learn how it works.
See ya on the other blog!
i read a lot of this thread and all of you have convinced me that
1. christians are all mad
2. i believe in jesus christ
and god the father and the holy spirit and the bible but i don't believe in any of you
happy not to belong to any fellowship and just attend the nearest fellowship if and when i feel like it
Dr. Koshy,
Since you claim to believe in Jesus Christ, that would make you a Christian too. And by your own definition you would be crazy as well. Welcome.
I drop in from time to time, boredom. I don't know if I mentioned it but I had a extra extra extra good visit the last time I went to salem fellowship the "smith's friends" church............much feeling the love there, it's just to much of a drive for me that's all at this point to much of a drive. I'm doing good at apostolic christian church of america, and living hope church, (with the apostolic christian church of america being my main church - but living hope their bible study "serious coffee" is always good for me always the fellowship is good the bible studies are solid) I'm glad to hear you are still going to church brother avy.
I think for awhile my war was against the smith's friends, but now I've realized no my war is against the principalities of darkness.............Ephesians 6:12
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." I'm very thankful for the body of christ in a larger whole these days, for surely it is a place I am able to get much much needed help.
Hey Harold, if you're still around, I finally responded to your last comment on my blog. Sorry it was SOOOO delayed... extenuating circumstances! Check it out. :)
Millard
http://tochristians.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/miracles-on-the-way-to-truth/#comment-118
Keith, although this discussion seems to have gone quiet now for some time, I hope that people continue to discover it and find it useful. Some people may interpret the silence that all things are better here in Owasso and that the girl has reunited with her family and all is fine now. I want to make sure that you and others know the truth. The family involved does have more contact with their daughter and from the outside would appear to be a normal relationship but don’t be fooled.
The church members here seem to be trying very hard to blend in with the community, distance themselves from past events and discredit the girl’s parents and family. There continues to be a concerted effort on their part to twist the truth and deceive as many people as they can.
One example of this happened just a few months ago. There was a conversation that took place between a church member (a daughter of the church leader) and some others who know the family. This church member communicated a number of blatant lies about the girl and her family. One of her statements was that this girl had to live with the church leader/school teacher because the girl’s family did not want her to become a Christian.
I find this statement to be very interesting and it reveals much about Smith’s Friends and their ideology. The girl was raised in a Christian home, confessed belief in Jesus Christ, and was baptized into the Christian faith. This Smith’s Friends church member was talking to people who knew the girl and her family but attend different churches, and believe in Jesus Christ.
For this person to make the statement that the family did not want their daughter to be a Christian in front of these Christians is really a slap in the face to them. What this is saying, in essence, is that none of these other people are Christian and that the Owasso Christian Fellowship members (in reality Brunstad, or Smith’s Friends) are the only real Christians on the planet.
There are many posts on this blog where the BCC members try to convince all of us that they don’t preach that message. But here is a BCC church member revealing the truth and showing how deep that ideology is ingrained in their teaching.
I also find interesting that the BCC web site and the local church members try so hard to blend in with the rest of the Christian world that they so vehemently deplore and that they would stoop to such tactics as lies and deception to hide their true beliefs.
Why would a church that believes the rest of the world are harlots and they should separate themselves from the “world” or “the organized religious world”, work so hard to blend in with all those people from all those harlot churches? Why would they care if they are so righteous? (Millard, those are rhetorical questions.)
Instead they seem to camouflage themselves to look like other Christians so that they can prey on those who are unaware. Like wolves hunting a flock of sheep. They lie in wait in the bushes for one to wander too far from the rest of the flock and then seize it.
The Mormons do the same thing. On the surface they proclaim to be just another church of Jesus Christ but the reality of their teaching is way different. But you won’t hear that in their public offerings. They go to great lengths to hide their true ideology. My understanding is that you only get the real Mormon doctrine if you are good enough to get invited to the temple. And all the temple proceedings are highly secret. Brunstad seems to operate in the same way.
Most coercive groups operate this way. They don’t reveal their true intentions or belief system to newcomers. This is reserved for those recruits that pass the initial phases of indoctrination and don’t ask too many questions. The deeper you get into the organization the more secrets that are unveiled.
Another way that this can create abnormal behavior in members is an emotional disconnect from anyone outside the group, especially family members or former friends. The deeper the indoctrination is the more that outside information is distrusted or ignored. At some point the group or leader does not have to personally preach against outside information, the members will do it to themselves. That is the place where the leader ultimately wants to get to. In this way the leader can claim to be uninvolved and the members believe they are free. But the group and leader have created a psychological box for the members. As long as the members stay inside the box they have a sense of freedom. If they start to stray from the box, as Millard did, then they run the risk of being disciplined, or ultimately excommunicated.
It seems that this is the place where the girl here in Owasso is. She is able to communicate with family members but there is no open dialog about personal things. You can talk about work, the weather, politics, or price of milk, but her church or personal life and past behaviors, or anything related to her friends (which consist of church families) are off limits. She won’t even be friends with her own brothers on Facebook, not to mention the rest of the family and former friends. She goes on vacation with church families frequently but never with her own family (which she and her husband have been invited to). She still has not stayed with anyone in her own family overnight since she moved in with this teacher’s family 6 years ago.
She is emotionally detached from her family because they are outside of her Smith’s Friends psychological box and she believes the lies about her family. But she is allowed just enough contact with her family to give the illusion that things are normal and discredit the girl’s parents.
This is much like what the Church of Scientology did to Nicole Kidman and her children with Tom Cruise. Marty Rathbun (former Scientology member and Tom Cruise’s auditor) told NBC “that church officials told Isabella, then nine, and Connor, then six, that their mother was a ‘suppressive person’”.. and “was somebody that they shouldn’t open up with, they shouldn’t communicate with, and they shouldn’t spend much time with.”
In the Church of Scientology “the ‘suppressive person’ is also known as the ‘anti-social personality’. Within this category you would find Napoleon, Hitler, the unrepentant killer and the drug lord.” according to their website.
It is clear that Nicole’s children, raised in Scientology, have been trained to think of their mother in the same light as Hitler. They will do the same thing to Katie Holm’s child if they get the chance. I think this is why she is fighting hard for sole custody. No parent wants their children turned against them like this, and most would not expect it from a church.
Smith’s Friends has done the same thing here in Owasso with this girl and in other places as well.
This teacher moved his former student into his home. This is typical of abusive and coercive groups to isolate their recruits from outside influences. Her personality changed so drastically, almost overnight, that it is obvious to anyone who knew her before that something was wrong. At the very least this is psychological abuse of the girl. This is abuse of her family too. And He has abused his position as a public school teacher.
There was an interesting article in the Tulsa paper Sunday July 15.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/specialprojects/news/crimewatch/article.aspx?subjectid=450&articleid=20120715_19_A1_CUTLIN275666
This article is focused on sexual misconduct between teachers and students, but there is a lot of information that is relevant to this case and what this teacher has done even though there is no evidence that sex was involved here.
Terri Miller, president of Stop Educator Sexual Abuse, Misconduct and Exploitation, a Las Vegas-based group that provides support to victims and their families referring to student victims said “They don't realize it is child sexual abuse when they've been groomed to believe otherwise.” It is interesting that she used to word ‘groomed’ because I believe that is exactly what this teacher did with this girl while he had her in class. She was groomed to believe that he was a nice Christian man, that her parents were suppressing and controlling, and at 18 that she was an adult and could do whatever she wanted.
This article includes a list of what to look for in your children:
*If they tend to suddenly hate an activity they have always loved, or hate a particular coach or teacher that they seemed to have liked before, or if there is a sudden change in attitude toward the adults in their life;
*If a child is depressed, withdrawn or isolated from family or friends;
*If they seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time with a particular teacher, coach or adult in life and seem to be completely enamored with them.
These signs are right on track but unfortunately for this family and others, by the time these things are noticeable it is too late. The abuse, the programming, the indoctrination, has already taken place. And when the child is 18 there is almost nothing you can legally do if you can’t prove that sex is involved. But abuse, misconduct, and exploitation was (and is) still involved.
The article also makes the statement about potential child predators…”If they wield too much authority over a child that crosses into the child’s personal life.”
By the way, the article also states that “Sex between a teacher and a student who is younger than 21 is considered statutory rape under Oklahoma law.” I wonder if this applies to former students as well.
Harold:
Nice to hear from you. Haha, thanks for keeping me clued in on your rhetoric. ;-) I'm glad you posted and reminded everyone that nothing has been resolved. You seem to be getting a bit fired up about that teacher and what he did. Good for you, and more power to you. I wonder if the best retort to the atheistic challenge, "So where was God when so-and-so did such-and-such to that poor victim?" would be, "God was right there with me when I stopped him." Of course, most Christians can't in honestly give a retort like that, because just like atheists (and sometimes even more so) they don't step in until it's too late.
I'm indiscriminately bashing here. No particular favorite, believer or otherwise. Because of our timidity (read COWARDICE) in "civilized" nations, we are so concerned about our rep and ego that we let the buggers get away with murder or rape or child abuse before we risk standing up to them. And even then we don't stand up to them. We call law enforcement or child protective services to come in and do damage control for us, so that we can stay cozy on our couches, munching chips, guzzling beer, and watching the ball game like real men.
It's funny how as time goes by you and I seem to see things more alike rather than less. I like that. I have to say you gave an excellent rundown on the subtle tactics used by SF, and I presume by other predatory groups. You mentioned Mormons and Scientology. I've had only nominal experience with those groups, so I can't say much about them other than that ANY lack of transparency should be a red flag to people interested in truth as opposed to wanting their ears tickled.
Not to be outdone... (naw, not really competing--you know me once I get going...) I do have some things to add.
I take no exception to what you wrote, but I do take exception to something that you might have implied by omission: that "mainstream" churches are significantly better than "cults." It would be naive and ludicrous to think that large, established churches are not involved in masking their real agendas, or that they aren't just as guilty of lack of transparency as Mormons or Scientologists. Church politics is still politics, most of which goes on in closed, secretive meetings. It's just as dirty there as politics are anywhere else, compounded by an extra layer of hypocrisy because they, of all people, should know better. Not only that, but church leaders ought to resort to the wisdom of God and the power of the Spirit, not the shenannigans of men and leverage. There aren't thousands upon thousands of denominations and sects within each major split--Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant--because church leaders generally FOLLOW Jesus' teaching and demonstrate the wisdom of God. That kind of track record ought to be damning, but Churchians seem to have swallowed the blue pill and absorb the doctrinal opiate drip delivered via a dissemination system that rivals the Matrix, while the real story is anything but rosy.
Prime example: every cult characteristic that has consensus behind it is true of the Roman Catholic Church, more so in some periods than others. It manages to deflect recognition of this by virtue of sheer size. Anything that immense and varied ends up naturally developing internal checks and balances, otherwise it would go off the rails, crash, and burn like so many small groups do. Roman Catholics practice exactly the same personage veneration that leads to bizarre behavior in smaller, younger groups. Its size gives it credibility and its diversity gives it a vestige of normalcy, so we tend not to class it along with other cults. Maybe cultishness is like liquor: after many generations and lots of exposure, a gene pool develops enough resistance to enable them to manage the stuff without self-destruction.
(cont'd...)
(...cont'd)
I think that the blending in you mentioned that is happening with SF is a natural step and easily understood, once you realize that SF is not fundamentally a church, but a business. Big business. One of the kids I knew in Salem, OR ended up handling the finances for the SF group there. I have heard now from several sources that not long ago he ran off with millions of dollars of the group's money. Not thousands. Millions. I haven't heard that they are prosecuting him, and last mention of him was that someone saw him on TV, courtside at a pro basketball game (a Lakers game if I remember correctly.) I suppose that SF wants to avoid the press and public embarassment. You don't let someone steal millions and do nothing unless you have plenty more. (This stuff comes through SF kids that my sons know.)
SF's primary agenda is neither religion nor the welfare of its members, but empire building, pure and simple. I find nothing Christian about imperialism. I don't think Jesus does either. This is why I'm unconcerned about SF ideology and consider it a red herring, a decoy. Their doctrines are gnats they put out there for us to strain. The goals of those leading the group have nothing to do with ideology. I know some of these men. They are not idealists, but exploiters. They use ideology as window dressing to distract people from paying attention to the little guys behind the curtains. That kind of distraction technique wouldn't fly in parts of the world where people scrape by on little to nothing, but in Europe and N. America where the norm is filthy rich by comparison, believing that financial success is a sign of God's blessing becomes an easier camel to swallow, and many swallow it whole.
God's blessing does not a mega-church make, but greed, lust, and a keen sense for the kinds of things that Jesus hated and condemned--arrogant conceit, abuse of power, love of money, and lording it over the flock--are time-tested methods for making a killing and building worldly kingdoms with the spoils. It doesn't matter how many Bible verses they quote.
The other reason their blending in is unsurprising: Uh-durh! They finally figured out that you can't grow rich if you alienate your marketplace. You nailed it when you described their subversive, predatory methods. Those were in operation for as long as I knew the group. When you think you're the good guys, you see it as clandestine work, keeping below the enemy's radar to minimize interference. You don't think of it as sneaky or underhanded, but that's because you already swallowed the blue pill and believe that EVERYONE in the "religious world" (that might be old terminology now) is deceived by "the Harlot" and under the sway of Satanic spiritual forces. With all that evil spiritual power roving around, it makes sense to keep a low profile and single out those who seem "receptive" to your message. (Those terms in quotes were all oft-used jargon when I was in the group.)
(cont'd...)
Millard wrote:
“I take no exception to what you wrote, but I do take exception to something that you might have implied by omission: that "mainstream" churches are significantly better than ‘cults.’ “
It really intrigues me the way you assume that I have “implied by omission” something and you take it and run with it like that is what I believe. That is like the Democrats who claim that the Republicans want to throw all grandmothers off a cliff, and want dirty water for all Americans…etc.
I agree with what you wrote and I am glad you wrote it but please don’t assume that I believe something simply because I didn’t address a specific issue.
There is a lot of politics at play in all organizations, even churches. Always has been, always will be. But that doesn’t make it right. And there are actually cults that work within some mainstream churches. Just because someone attends a major church in a big denomination like Baptists or Presbyterians, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be careful. Coercive discipleship groups can exist in any denominations.
While someone should be cautious in looking for a church, there is one big difference Millard. Most mainstream churches do not break up families in the name of Jesus Christ!!!
Dirty politics is annoying and should not happen in any organization especially those that claim to follow Jesus Christ, but intentionally causing destructive emotional and spiritual damage to people and their families in order to gain wealth and power like this Smith’s Friends group in Owasso is just plain evil and a whole different ball game.
Another thing I would like to point out is in reference to your comment about the cult like characteristics of the Roman Catholic Church. In Dr. Lifton’s work he identified eight characteristics that defined coercive groups. According to him, if a group exhibited 6 out of these 8 characteristics then there exists an environment where “thought reform” is taking place. If a particular group exhibits only 3 of these characteristics, there may be some manipulation involved but not the destructive “totalism” system that defines a destructive cult.
I agree that you can examine behaviors of the Roman Catholic Church throughout history and they do exhibit a lot of these cult characteristics. You can say the same thing about many groups, religious, political, or business, however they may not be full blown destructive cults. They may be somewhere lower on that Lifton scale of 1 to 8. Some Smith’s Friends fellowships may, at times, exhibit all 8 characteristics while some fellowships may only exhibit 5 or 6. This can make it hard for someone outside, or from different fellowships, to label them as a whole. But I believe, based on what I have observed, read about, and testimonials from former members that Smith’s Friends, as a whole, exhibits most of these 8 characteristics.
I also know a few Catholic families and they are not known for separating and destroying family relationships, at least not in Owasso Oklahoma at this time in history.
Please don’t take this as a defense of past, or recent, behaviors within the Catholic Church. I agree that there are a lot of bad things that have happened even recently and they need to be exposed. It’s just that, in my opinion, you can’t label them or even equate them with groups like the People’s Temple or Heaven’s Gate.
Cults tend to define everything as black or white as in either you are with us or against us. I believe there is a lot of gray in this world. Not everything is black or white, which leaves a lot of room for opinions and healthy discussions.
Wow! Once again Blogger arbitrarily trashed one of my posts. This was the third part. I know it posted because I got an email to that effect. Weird.
I'll respond to Harold after reposting this.
haha, comments took it over the limit. I'll have to post the third part in a 3rd and 4th part...
Originally posted on 8/15/2012 at 6:28 AM BST (British Summer Time--I'm in England for a few months!)
=======
(...cont'd)
From the outside it's easier to see it for what it really is, like you wrote: wolves in sheep's clothing slinking around, looking for the weak to lure away, kill, and eat. And these days they seem to be luring, killing, and eating like there's no tomorrow, and by "weak" I mean young from their own flocks. It's almost become official, obligatory service for any young person who wants to be considered "along" and "whole-hearted" and "zealous" (AKA a bona-fide member in good standing) to volunteer for duty in Europe, or wherever the building projects are going on. Church-run hotels and conference centers are being staffed by what in effect is slave labor; construction site labor is augmented by willing and able youth working for nothing or next to nothing; and back at home, there's weekly and sometimes twice-weekly opportunities, providing paid services staffed with volunteers, and the proceed get sent to Brunstad or sometimes deposited in a local building fund.
That's not all. Church members are being encouraged to take out mortgages on their homes and donate the proceeds or purchase items for literally thousands of times their value. I have a article that appeared in the Norwegian newspaper Bergen's Times that mentions the mortgages and another example of their money-grubbing extremes: a Norwegian barbeque, worth between $200 and $350, was auctioned for the equivalent of $43,200 at the time. It also mentions a "100,000 kroner club." At the time of the article, 1 Norwegian kroner was worth about 18 US cents. Here's a rough translation of some of the article that you can find at http://www.bt.no/nyheter/lokalt/Kjpte-blpanne-til-kvart-million-2517020.html.
(cont'd...)
Originally posted on 8/15/2012 at 6:28 AM BST
(...cont'd)
========== Bergens Tidende, Feb. 9, 2011
"Bought Barbeque For a Quarter Million"
(excerpt)
The church's internal Web site published, among other things, instructions on how to take out a loan so that you can join the "NOK 100,000 Club." [NOK = Norwegian kroner, 100,000 NOK = $18,000 USD]
"Friends" are being encouraged to contact their own bank or the loan company Property Finance. They are instructed to mark payment as "gift" payable to "building fund".
In return, members of the club get a hoodie with logo and membership number on the back. A template of a loan application also appears on the website.
The church's members are very generous when auctions are held to raise money for the hotel project. On May 9, a fair was held where over one million [kroner] came in. [$180,000 USD at the time.]
Meeting minutes stated, "It should be vigorously promoted. A payment deadline should be set in June, because holiday bonuses are paid then and (for the lucky ones) more money at tax refund time!"
A bålpanne (a deep, roomy steel firepan) was auctioned off for 240,000 kroner, it also states. [$43,200 USD at the time]
The buyer of the bålpannen referred us to the church leadership and does not wish to speak to BT about the auction.
=========== end of excerpt
Here's a link to a photo of a bålpanne: http://produkter.felleskjopet.no/trade/productview/867710/901/
Not much to it, especially not for $43,000!
I mean BIG when I say big business, maybe not by American mega-standards, but hey! We're not talking small potatoes here. And this isn't the Big Apple; this is "Lille Norge" (Little Norway, one of their favorite names) an entire country with a population the size of Washington state. Brunstad is one of the biggest things they've got going up there near reindeer land. They are currently working on a BILLION kroner conference center expansion project. ($168,233,000 at today's rates if the budget hasn't increased) Quite a nifty little remodel, all funded by the faithful.
I wrote elsewhere that wolves are interested in one thing and only one thing: access to sheep. Interfere with their food supply and they'll attack. Otherwise, they can baahaa and look all cute and fluffy just like real sheep do. It's easy to differentiate: real sheep don't bite.
OK Harold, here's my response to your last post:
Haha, looks like I must have gotten the ol' cortisol pumping (increased heart rate, heavy breathing, elevated blood pressure, diminished capacity to read what's there instead of what your reactions are telling you.) This would be me being snide if the same thing didn't happen to me so often. I sometimes have to go back and read things a second or third time to make sure I'm not overreacting. (transparency: this is me poking fun at you and letting you know we're in the same boat, I'm no different.)
I stated: "I take no exception to what you wrote, but I do take exception to something that you MIGHT have implied by omission..." I capitalized the crucial word that it seems you overlooked, the one I put there ON PURPOSE to make clear that I was NOT assuming, I was NOT claiming to believe that you had implied something by omission, but that it was an easy implication for anyone to take away from what you wrote, and--pardon me for allowing the possibility--you MIGHT have meant to imply just that. I'm still not sure whether you did or didn't.
So here's how it looks to me at this point: I made a simple statement that still holds true. You MIGHT have. It's STILL true because, as is your wont sometimes, you focused on something that wasn't there (my alleged, fictitious assumption) and side-stepped the point. So, we still don't know whether you intended to imply that mainstream churches are significantly better than cults, because you still haven't enlightened us on that point.
Judging from your response, you clearly DO think that mainstream churches are significantly better than cults. You made sweeping generalizations, the very same kind that you have called me to task for several times in the past. E.g., "Most mainstream churches do not break up families in the name of Jesus Christ!!!"
The basic difference between your view on generalizations and my view on them is that you claim that they are unwarranted or inappropriate (according to your objections in past posts), while I think that they are very useful. They shouldn't be kept off the table; they should be laid on heavy and thick so that we can look at them and ask questions about them, such as: What is your evidence? Does the evidence support the generalization? What are the exceptions? Why are there exceptions? Is the generalization overly broad or not broad enough? Etc.
The generalizations a person chooses to make are very informative and interesting.
By accepting generalizations into a discussion and asking those questions, we learn things and we get to know each other. By objecting to generalizations (especially just those you don't like) none of that interesting stuff comes to light. What's more, you don't just exclude the generalization; you exclude a voice. You exclude the experience, insight, and wisdom present in the generalization. Even a really bad, unfounded generalization represents some measure of experience, thought, insight, even wisdom. When someone says something, even a lie, we can learn from them. Every time a voice is silenced, spiritual violence is committed, and someone's dignity is violated.
tbc...
(...cont'd)
I accept your generalization gladly. I also think it's preposterous, but that's just my opinion. The good stuff comes from asking the questions. What is your evidence? It's hard to provide evidence for something NOT happening, i.e., mainstream church home-wrecking. It might happen all the time unknown to you. You might be looking in the wrong places for evidence. You MIGHT (notice that I use that word a lot?) not have any evidence at all. You might just want it to be that way and simply claim that it is that way, knowing you have no evidence at all. These are all possibilities that only you could illuminate for us. Please do.
I think your generalization is preposterous because it conveniently ignores glaring evidence which has been obvious and well-known for a long time. In 500+ years of the existence of Protestant churches, OVER 10,000 denominations have formed. I've been through this before. That's not just 10,000 church splits. That's 10,000 highly organized, committed, heavily argued, politicked, and embattled (including actual killing), ENTRENCHED positions of ANIMOSITY involving HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of people. Oh yeah, let's not forget, many of those entrenched positions at various times CONSIGN THEIR RIVALS TO HELL. These are supposed to be followers of the God of love.
No matter what kind of sophisticated, benevolent, wise mask you put on it, damnation results from hatred. In the face of long-standing, ONGOING (we're not talking ancient history) hatred, strife, and division among those who SHOULD BE BRETHREN, are you really going to argue that families don't get torn apart in all that? Let's not even get into the pastors, priests, and other "Reverends" who abuse their power and the trust of their followers to molest children and commit adultery AND COVER IT UP. For every scandal, there was a cover-up before it became known. In many cases, the cover-ups are conducted or at least condoned by the orgnanizations that host them. After all, would the neighboring churches and potential converts think? It's been going on since nuns and priests and their clandestine orgies, and before.
Are you really going to argue that the home-wrecking in mainstream churches is significantly less than in the "unbelieving" world in general, let alone cults? To me, that's preposterous, but I can always, at any point, be wrong. If you want to argue that, let us know what evidence you have to support it.
You ended your post with references to black-and-white thinking. I agree that real life is not black and white, which makes me wonder why you are so intent on maintaining a black-and-white distinction between cults vs. significantly different (although admittedly corrupt) mainstream churches. They share more similarities than they don't. You actually affirmed my contention that mainstream churches are not significantly different than cults when you covered dirty church politics, that cults form in mainstream churches, coercive discipleship groups, etc. We have a name for the beginnings of cult-like groups: cliques. They are everywhere. That's my point. Cult mentality occurs at all levels, in cults and in "normal" organizations. It's misleading to come up with a special "cult" category, because it implies a false sense of security, a false sense that groups that don't "qualify" as "cults" are significantly better, safer. That's an illusion and misses the point, the point being that cult excesses begin in cult thinking, and cult thinking is everywhere. There is no difference between what the teacher in Owasso did and what a con man who seduces a young girl with wedding in her eyes and turns her against her family. They just use different bullshit to do it.
tbc...
(...cont'd)
What's more, I argued that mainstream churches are not significantly different than cults. I did not argue that they are the same. Of course there are differences. There are differences between cults, for that matter. That's another problem with the "cult" label and actually one of the reasons people like using it. Once you throw a group in the "cult" can, they all turn into zebras: barely distinguishable from each other. Not only are they all basically, fundamentally the same, i.e., BAD, the label deters us from looking closely enough to understand them and notice differences. It also allows us to avoid noticing how SIMILAR they are to us and the organizations we prefer.
Even if you are right and there is markedly less tendency in mainstream churches to wreck homes than there is among "cults," your argument is a "they crossed the line" argument. Going too far, being more extreme doesn't necessarily mean that cults are substantively, intrinsically different. A "little Hitler" is different than Hitler because he or she doesn't actually send Jews to gas chambers. But we call people "little Hitlers" because we recognize tendencies in them that are remarkably similar to the real thing, just on a smaller scale. The simple fact that a group doesn't take their agendas to extremes does not mean that their agendas are significantly different.
Seeing things in similar terms, being motivated in similar ways to achieve similar goals, and being willing to sacrifice the welfare of individuals for the "greater good" and damn (or destroy) anyone who resists it, all these are SIGNIFICANT characteristics that are shared by worldly corporations, mainstream churches (Catholics included), and cults alike. They all want to dominate, amass fortunes and property, secure ongoing access to cheap human resources, and destroy their enemies. They pursue these VERY SIMILAR agendas by different means. In comparison with their HUGE similarities, their differences aren't negligible, but they certainly don't trump.
I agree, mainstream churches and cults are not the same. There are superficial differences and differences of the extent they'll go to pursue their agendas. But their agendas are very, very similar. And while you are arguing that mainstream churches are different, you miss some huge points. You never claimed that they are beyond reproach, as Paul wrote they should be. You never pointed out that the differences between mainstream churches and cults are so glaring that they need no argument. In fact, they are not that glaring. You do need to argue the point. The differences aren't apparent. Except for ideology and advertising, in other words, in terms of real life, real behavior, and real outcomes, differences are actually hard to find.
None of that touches on the elephant in the room. You can see the elephant by looking on the flip side. Why aren't the differences between mainstream churches and cults, and for that matter the "unbelieving" world, SO GLARING that EVERYBODY is aware of them? Why doesn't everybody already know? I can answer that easily: lack of evidence.
If Jesus were here running things, do you think there would be any question? Wouldn't there be LOTS of evidence that His church is not just different, but a radical alternative to everything else? The fact that the OPPOSITE is the case is a HUGE indication that Jesus is NOT running things in mainstream churches. So, then, who is?
tbc...
(...cont'd)
But that wasn't actually the best question to ask. You can see the elephant in the room even more clearly by asking: Why is there such a HUGE DIFFERENCE between the way mainstream churches ARE and the way that they WOULD BE if they actually lived and demonstrated the life of Christ? Or a similar question: What would mainstream churches be like if Jesus ran things and they actually followed Him? As it is, He doesn't and they don't. That's the problem. In light of that, the differences between mainstream churches and cults amount to freckle placement on conjoined twins.
The sad thing to me Harold is that, throughout your response, you ignored the key issue: personage veneration. Maybe that's cryptic. Veneration of persons. Its also called charisma. In churches, especially ones like the Catholic Church and cults, it gets officially sanctioned, formalized, institutionalized, and perpetuated.
Here's quoting you from your April 14, 2011 post:
"The basic underlying theme, for me is that, in almost all of these other faiths, veneration of the followers begins and ends with the leader. The Mormons consider Joseph Smith a prophet on equal footing with Jesus Christ. Muslims hold Mohammed right up there with God. Isn’t this the kind of idol worship that you referred to?
*The cult's leaders center the veneration of members upon themselves.* Margaret Singer"
And this is different than veneration or the Pope or the Dhali Lama HOW exactly? Their persons are OK to venerate, but Joseph Smith or Muhammad are not? Veneration of persons is the central dynamic of ANY cult. It's also the central dynamic of cliques, denominations, Catholic orders, faternal "brotherhoods", tabloid readers, corporate and governmental power structures, and pretty much anywhere that groups form around agendas. A group might start sincerely, but in short order it becomes a matter of following some champion or leader, and eventually you end up with 10,000 denominations of "brotherhood" all claiming to be champions of love while they villify and exterminate heretics and other minions of the devil.
Interesting facts from the New American Standard Bible: Jesus referred to himself as the Son of God or God's Son 7 times in the NT. He refered to himself as the Son of Man 80 times, more than 10 times for each time he claimed deity. In contrast, only 3 NT references to Jesus as Son of Man came from the apostles. In contrast, they referred to him as Son of God or God's Son 67 times, almost 10 times as much as Jesus did. That's a HUGE departure from Jesus' own emphasis. So, who was trying to preclude people venerating Him, and who was guilty of overemphasizing His divinity when measured by his own words? Just because He was Jesus Christ doesn't preclude his followers from venerating him in unhealthy ways, then or now.
I'm glad you mentioned Lifton. I read "Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of 'Brainwashing' in China" during my process of self-deprogramming in the mid-90s. It was fascinating. But it had nothing to do with cults. He studied Chinese POWs after they got back. Lifton's work was appropriated (with good reason) by cult researchers and watchdog groups. I think his list is a great tool. Here it is:
1. Milieu Control.
2. Mystical Manipulation.
3. Demand for Purity.
4. Confession.
5. Sacred Science.
6. Loading the Language.
7. Doctrine over person.
8. Dispensing of existence.
There isn't a SINGLE ONE of those that doesn't fit the Catholic Church TO A TEE. Call a spade a spade, man. It doesn't matter that it is a gigantic, obscenely and criminally opulent spade. That doesn't count in heaven. And recognize those tactics WHEREVER they are. They are the same ones used by abusers in codependent 1-on-1 relationships. Same logic, manipulation, and predatory agenda, and the same psychological deficiencies that keep "victims" stuck in hell for years on end.
I'm married to a unbeliever, and my marriage would be strained greately nomadder the church I am going to. I've grown to fear churches that exclude me - that potentially idolize ex. or current leaders......grown to fear the "cult logic" that all to often means DON'T LOVE SHERI NO CAN DO THAT.
Though I don't like mainstream christianity like slews cause they are not like the apostolic christian church of america with a concrete doctrine (apostolic christian church of america you walk in their church there's pamplets entailing everything they believe bible verses etc.)
Somedays satan looks real good to me I won't lie. (not justin beeber though, just satan)
I am astonished that a post about Smith's friends can span 4 years and 1900 messages! I couldn't read them all, that might take me the 4 years it took to write them, but I wanted to drop a quick message since I did spend several hours reading through everything.
First of all, I am a prior BCC (Smith's Friends) member, and most of my family is still there. I am in regular contact with them and the reasons I'm estranged in the cases where I am estranged, has nothing to do with BCC. I think the amount of control the "brothers" have varies from location to location. The only exception is if Mr. Smith from Norway intervenes, I'm not sure anyone would stand up against him.
To call BCC a cult is perhaps true, perhaps not. I think, in my humble opinion it is more a cult in the way the "popular kids" in high school are a cult. They like eachother and no one else. It's hard to break into the group and once you do, you don't want to leave because you get so much of your identity from them. If you do turn your back on them, they may continue to acknowledge you in the hallway, but beyond that, it's just not the same. Is this Christian? No. And that is the reason I left.
I left because I started reading my bible, alone, and without overlaying it with their "jargon." That alone made me realize the preachings I'd heard weren't the truth.
I hold no ill intent against any member of BCC. I love many of them and am happy that some have found a place they call home. However, in my opinion, it is not a church. It is a social organization where if you are "in", the benefits are fantastic. I don't believe many get actual money from them, beyond the typical scholarship for a special event or something. But they have fantastic family days, great playgrounds, and something going on every night of the week. If you like to keep your friends close, and don't like to move beyond your comfortable circle or want to travel the world without spending much, BCC may be the place for you.
Just don't join expecting to become like Jesus. Because what I experienced there was not the Jesus I read about. He loved, served, and prayed for strangers, sinners, and people without any credibility. He met needs outside of his community. And His gospel was never elitist or with an air of superiority.
I love the committment the members have to this group. If everyone had such committment to all their endeavors think of what we could accomplish!
I'd like to caution anyone doing research on BCC or stumbling across this that there are still many people who have left BCC who still get their identity from them. Only now, it is as an ex-BCC member, "recovering cultmember", etc. At some point, when someone chooses to spend as much energy hating the group as they did loving it, I wonder just how far they've really "recovered."
The reason I found this has been resolved, so I don't think I'll see any replies if anyone has some. So, you'll have to memo me in another way if needed. I'm not a regular blogger so I really don't know how it all works.
God Bless You all. It is a happy life knowing we are never alone.
I got to say i think pretty much like what Sold have said. I was very fustrated at this church and still very hurt and destroyed for probably the rest of my life. Unless I do find help. I wish I would have read more about this church before I got myself into it. I cant blame the church it self for the probleme I am in but I know that the church is one of the reason why I have some of my problem , since I left the church , i have read alot and thought alot about the past 15 years. And GOD as given me the strenght to forgive the people that have hurt me and are still hurting me. I think that every church have their probleme and its hidden. I still have lots of respect for some of the brothers in that church.My kids will probably go to that church for all their life and I will always give them the right to do what they want. as long i know they are safe and they are happy. Only thing I can do to help my kids its guiding them to the bible and if they see that certain things in that church dont match up with bible says , then they will have to make their own decision, I have been to many many church, and I havent found one that is 100% like the bible. I deside to put my heart to rest. and GO on with my broken life. hopefully one day I will understand why I met this church and why my life as fallen appart.
Hi Guys,
Recently I have been attending this church. And my views are posted here.
In most of the main line churches, Grace means- something that is given free of cost for someone who don’t deserve it.
In my opinion, the Brunstad Christian Church believes Grace means – the help from God to avoid sin.
Ok, this does not offend me, coz all those Pentecost, Methodist, CSI, AG churches I have attended never taught me to sin as I wish. Everyone taught me to seek the help of Holy Spirit to lead a pure life. It’s a process we go through till death to purify ourselves from the nature of our flesh.
http://brunstadchristianchurchreview.blogspot.in/
Hi Guys,
Please see my blog. I have made some observations about this Church...
http://cultornotbcc.blogspot.in/
Please comment your views
Please leave your prayers for Smith’s Friends here
http://prayer4churches.wordpress.com/
HI I have created a blog with all the possible information I could gather about the Brunstad Christian Church. And I have put a series of questions one needs to ask before getting into Brunstad Christian Church or the Smith's friends. Please let me know your insights
https://brunstadchristianchurch.wordpress.com/
My name is laurent Boer (laurentfreetheSS@hmamail.com), and I have been harrassed and manipulated by an unknown hidden cult organization
They drugged me insidiously, hypnotized me, they programmed my mind with hypnosis and several different kind of drugs, and they didn’t hesitated to do many illegal things including:
- Under hypnosis, mental conditioning to make me feel terror to talk about them and what they do
- use some addiction drugs to enforce the power of the hypnotizer on me
- At work, air spray some kind of GHB drugs to train me to work harder
- Under hypnosis, format my personality to fit their needs
- Follow me in shops and coffee places to make me feel paranoid, harassed and under their control
- Under hypnosys make me watch horror and homo movies every day under addictive drugs to get addicted to this
- Installed software on my computer so they can remotely send subliminal trigger images
- Under hypnosis make me hear for hours daily their speech teaching me that what they do to me is great and usefull
How to get rid of this kind of secured powerfull worldwide organizations?
Best Regards,
Laurent
Just stumbled upon this site...
"The Truth" IS speaking the absolute TRUTH!
Born and raised in the Church(SF).... I know everything he says to be true!
The only thing I have to say is this.
Aside from their ridiculous belief systems and cult like existence lay horrors one could not imagine going on behind closed doors!! I lived it, and to this day suffer because of so so so many things! I posted an article on my private FB page once that I had written, in an exercise to help me heal and somewhat tell my story, suggested by my therapist...and the outlash I received from it, nearly did me in, including from my own family.... but threats from the church came in from leading brothers, that were just terrifying!
I would never, NEVER judge someone who chooses to not use their own identity when talking about any of this.... Unless you have lived within this church, you have NO clue..... and those that were with the church for a time, would not know much of what also actually goes on....Please do not judge, unless you've lived it!
Post a Comment