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 1001 – 1200 of 1940 Newer› Newest»To John, Sophie, and Harold:
This may be a 'difficult to answer' kind of question, but it is relevant to what has been discussed on this blog...
The word 'harlot' has been put out there (most notably by John) as how SF views all the other churches and denominations in the world. There are three kinds of harlots written about in the Bible: an actual prostitute (which is not what we are talking about), the spirit of harlotry (which can be like the spirit of an immoral or unprincipled woman--Websters) and the harlot spoken of in Revelations. My question is... (In contrast to how it is defined in Sigurd Bratlie's book, The Bride and the Harlot):
Who, or what, is the harlot that is written about in Revelations?
We can agree, I assume, that John had these visions on Patmos of the future, which are being fulfilled little by little as time goes by--And will one day be completely fulfilled as the end times come to a close. So, Bratlie had his interpretation that no doubt the three of you (and possibly more) disagree with. Answer the question.
To John:
Going back quite some time... You posted a link to an impeccability argument that 'debunked' the passage in Phillippians (and His temptations in the wilderness) using some Greek verb form analysis. I can't find it right now to comment on it directly so I'll have to go off memory. I meant to write this response to it much earlier.
The author makes at least one large simplification when he argues that Jesus' temptations did not lure and entice him. If I recall correctly he makes it sound as if the thing that was being offered to Him (the temptation) had no effect on His human body--because He was God in the form of a human, and God can't be lured and enticed. This is very hard to refute if I don't have the text in front of me, would you please provide the URL again?
The second point, the one that I remember quite well, regarding the shortcomings of the author's work are about Satan. Just to establish a few things:
Satan was the most perfect angel created. He was the wisest angel created, but he allowed pride into his heart and he exalted himself to be equal with God. Therefore God threw him out of heaven.
In his argument the author makes Satan out to be a dupe or a pawn. My question, as I read the article, was this: "Why would the wisest creature on the earth 'tempt' someone (God in human form) that couldn't be 'tempted'? Honestly? Satan would know that God couldn't have been tempted or even accepted his offers and wouldn't have wasted his precious time just for our sake. Is this a valid point? Or do you have other Greek verb form arguments that debunk my question?
Or did God just trick Satan into 'tempting' Him? I say no. I argue that Satan knew that Jesus could have been tempted (established by scripture minus the Greek) and could have accepted and given in to the temptation and consequently sinned. Thanks and praise to Jesus that He, as Paul writes in Hebrews 5:7, cried out with loud cries and tears to Him who was able to save Him (in His time of need, the temptation), and was heard because of His Godly fear. If the 'temptations' didn't have an effect, a drawing power on His mind, body, and soul, He never would have had to ask for help from God. Yet He did ask for help to overcome in His time of need (the temptations).
If you can explain why Satan would have fake 'tempted' (by fake I mean that Jesus didn't feel the lure of the temptation) Jesus and why Jesus prayed to God with loud cries and tears "to Him who was able to save Him from death" (this isn't the death on Calvary, it is the death as the result of sin--The wages of sin is death), I will have much more respect for your understanding of Christianity. If it is a good rebuttal I might even have to question my own beliefs seriously. We shall see.
Blogmaster: Does your songbook include Hymn #370: Verse 3
Evil spirits round us hover,
Seeking entrance to our mind,
They shall know us and discover
They no place within can find.
Friends and family use persuasion;
Comfort for the flesh have they.
Bolt the door! Resist temptation!
All such comfort drive away!
If Smith’s Friends doesn’t include separation of family and friends in their core teaching then why put this in their song book? Doesn’t this verse equate family and friends with evil spirits?
Of course this is a double standard because this only means those friends and family outside the group.
And, no, it is not your English that makes me laugh. It is your arrogance to write this statement “Finally, it should make you all - and especially John - very happy to know that those two myths are eliminated.” As if everything is right and in order now just because YOU have spoken.
Please excuse me for not drinking your Kool-Aid.
I just opened my smith's friends hymnal been talking w/mainstream christian pastor of my church getting myself some smith's friends post cult counseling finally song 370 that is so messed up! Only a cult from the pits of hell would have that song in their hymnal. Some their almond blossom songs are super demented in my opinion they clean have their kids singing "the world is dark and blackness"etc etc. not those exact words but same theme, these super bleak songs I just sat there beside myself like why????????????? And how did I end up in this nether world hell called "the smith's friends"???
I agree w/the smith's friends idea of the "harlot" she's the world she is razzle dazzle, at same time I think jesus came to give me life more abundantly a happy abundant life and I was miserabler then all hell trying to live by the smith's friends strict standards - and even when I was trying not watching tv, not wearing makeup or pants or short skirts - they still found something to shun me for....I could never be good enough.........and I was miserable. It wasn't a abundant life in my opinion........if you can't do xxxxxxxxx cause that's of the world it's not a abundant life, it's a hell. I couldn't bellydance in the smith's friends I was told they absolutely couldn't have a sister bellydancing - what a trying to not cuss "not fun experience" to be told I can't go have some fun dancing. My idea of a abundant life is I get to bellydance and have fun! It's good to like try not to all be overboard w/the fashions etc. but jesus didn't come I don't think to whack us all upside the head and make us live in holes to not contaminate ourselves w/the evil world. To the pure ALL things are pure! They aren't evil smith's friends - well they are to you cause you all ain't pure apparently!
To Harold:
Could I ask you to post the entire song lyrics from #370?
I would post them up myself, but I am not at home at the moment... assuming you are referring to Ways of the Lord #370.
Harold, do you think that you are using 1 line of 1 song a little selectively? It is possible that you are 'twisting' the meaning of that 1 line in that 1 song by relating it to the next line in that song. I will say (though I don't have the full song text in front of me) that the song in question is not about the doctrine of separating families by saying those family members not in SF are evil and equating them to evil spirits.
It is Biblical to guard your heart and mind against evil spirits--Ephesians 6. SF preaches this and has songs in its song book(s) that say this.
If we take a page from John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress we see that Christian left his family behind to seek deliverence from his burden. You (those arrayed against SF) could argue back to the original point of this blog and how the young lady's parents were Christian already so why did she have to 'leave' them... That isn't the point. The point is that family relationships should not, should never, come between a Christian and his/her calling to be saved, part of the body of Christ, among the Bride of Christ in the rapture, etc...
I did not author the song in question, but I understand that the second two lines Harold reprinted could mean exactly this. Christian, the character in the novel, HAD to leave his family. He didn't disrespect them or hate them or turn on them, but he did leave them. The oft quoted passage in Luke refers to this as well.
Unlike the muslims previously mentioned who had no qualms lying to an infidel, the SF does not preach/practice putting aside the Bible and its teachings when it concerns those not 'in' SF.
It really doesn’t matter what you call this SF organization….whether a cult or a sect. What matters is the disturbing, anti-Christian, divisive, threatening, lying, deceitful, coercive, manipulative, domineering, behaviors that have been demonstrated world-wide. Families have been torn apart as a direct result of this group; people have been made to feel worthless, fearful, angry, manipulated, distrustful, etc. And, those are just a few observations of behaviors that have surfaced.
Blogmaster: “According to many statements here, SF appears to do anything to keep the youth inside the group, including brain washing, isolation, violence etc. If all this was true, and you were a teacher for an 18 year old SF member wanting to leave the cult, how would you advice her about the relation to her parents?
I don't want your long answers to this; that is not the point. I only hope that this can make you all more objective and make you think twice before attacking "the other side".”
As you’ve stated, you don’t want our long answers to the hypothetical situation you’ve presented here. But, here are a few things I would NOT do: 1. I would NOT show a video of my ‘church’ or ‘religion’ in a public school classroom. 2. I would NOT proselytize on a public school campus, handing out literature written by my own ‘religious organization’ on a public school campus. 3. I would NOT ‘advise’ any student about the relationship with their parents – that is NOT the job description of a public school teacher. I would find all the uplifting, positive things that would encourage and build the relationship between a parent/child/teen unless the child/teen was being abused. If I was of the belief they were being abused, I’d contact DHS as is required by law. 4. I would NOT move any student (no matter how old they were) into my home and separate her from her own family.
There’s the word ‘attack’ again. Why do we keep seeing the words ‘slander’ and ‘attack’? Just because someone asks questions and voices opinions, why is that considered ‘attacking’ and ‘slanderous’?
More objective? Was this man being ‘more objective’ when he purposely undermined this girl’s parents, the Christian faith she was raised in, the relationships with all of her friends, extended family? Was he being ‘more objective’ when showed a video of his SF church in class?
This SF man most likely enjoys the privilege of teaching in the public schools and the privilege of receiving a paycheck from the taxpaying citizens. Why is it so difficult to understand that those paying his salary should expect him to behave responsibly in this capacity?
Dear RssanSpy:
It is really sad that you do not understand the difference between the figurative and the literal.
In the Hymn cited, any one who understands syntax and semantics would understand that an equation is being made between 'evil spirits' and 'friends and family'. The 'connotation' is that if 'friends and family' ask you not to be part of the SF cult, they are evil spirits. Harold is on target.
Bunyan's Pilgrims Progress is what is termed an 'allegory' in literary genres. Christian did not leave his family literally as you imagine or as SF brainwashing causes you to imagine. He traveled a spiritual path, a path where he meets temptations to not love the Lord and God Jesus Christ even when being with his family. It is not an exhortation to leave one's family and run away to Brunstad or the little holes where the SF 'foxes' live, as SF teaches.
Blogmaster:
You reek of arrogance but this very arrogance is what is put into the hearts of "core" SF leaders and you do come from the "core" by your own admission.
You said money does not flow to Brunstad from the churches - but yes it does!!
Further, does Brunstad not own all the businesses in the church wherever they may be. Brunstad and its directors who are all tied by family relationships together in some way or the other to certain 'core' families has found the perfect 'scheme' to 'own' expensive real estate and stuff around the world all built on the money sucked out of simple people in the church.
Brunstad is a cult where even the children are brainwashed into working for money (washing cars, doing little odd jobs in the house, etc) and then they are brainwashed further into putting all that money plus their pocket money into building "Brunstad - the New Jerusalem", "Brunstad - the heaven on earth", etc. Poor poor children! Of course, they are so well brainwashed that they will never think that they do not have to do as Brunstad tells them to do because their parents are well and truly brainwashed Brunstadites who believe in what Brunstad orders!
And then, there is the example of a "core" leader from Canada who was the cause for a family leaving the church. Why? Because he preached fierily that those who do not pay money to Brunstad through Davids Columns/ David's suitcases, etc, WILL NOT BE IN THE RAPTURE.
When he was asked about this, he said that is EXACTLY what would happen to these "bad" people in the Church who have "doubts" about it being the ONLY CHURCH and THE WAYS OF THE CHURCH.
That awakened that family to what lies underneath SF and they left for a more sober fellowship.
This same "good zealous example" in SF also put out a public tract soon after Zac Poonen disagreed with the SF doctrine and cult behaviour - a vicious attack on his brother-in-law - ample proof that SF encourages division and separation in families at the LITERAL level. First and total allegiance to the group is a must in SF and family really does not matter.
Dear RssanSpy
What does it matter what Sigurd Bratlie thought or wrote?
The truth is that if one reads the Gospels, it is as clear as light that the Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ never went around on earth calling others "harlots". Instead, he turned the harlot Mary Magdalene into a most beautiful person. He did not "exclude" her in any way or "judge" her. JO Smith, Bratlie and others are part of the crowd that wanted to insult her by calling her "harlot" and wanted to stone her to death!
This knowledge of the Lord and God Jesus Christ is enough for people like me and then when one gets close to people like Bratlie and Smith and preachers of the SF, one can smell that they do not have this "mind of Christ" but that they like to "judge" and "condemn" and "keep out" and "hate" and "keep away" from the "harlots" who are the people of all the other churches in the world.
May God save you from this error and this miserable to-be-pitied attitude which is not the "mind of Christ" but it is the "mind of JO Smith and Bratlie and the SF preachers" and these two minds are poles apart.
John:
If it is arrogant to tell the truth, then yes, I am arrogant, very arrogant.
The parrot repeats: The money flow goes from Brunstad to local projects (like them in Ukraine and India). The fundraising which you refered to from Melbourne was for the one-time financing of the building of the new conference center at Brunstad. As you did not seem to know I can tell you that less than 10 % of the total building cost was moved as debt to churches outside Norway.
You also mention Horze and IEC. These companies are businesses which generate money, and I don't see how it should be needed for the local churches to give money to finance a business which is making great profit. Again the money stream goes the opposite way.
Harold:
About the song 370, I can admit that the English translation of this song differs from the version in Norwegian which is the original language, and it might be easier to misunderstand in English. It is difficult both to get the lyrics to match to the melody and keep the exact message of the song when translating it. Here is a more direct translation:
"Evil spirits fly around us
seeking to take place in our mind
they must sense that we are alive
that they can't be let in
Family and friends with their best intentions
try to comfort our flesh
For this comfort make a stop
this door must be shut"
The evil spirits are for example envy or seeking honour of man. As a human being can't fly, nor take place in my mind, it is obvious to me that this verse don't mean a physical person. Still the evil spirit can be transfered to me from a human being who already is occupied by the evil spirit, for example a racist can bring racism into my mind if I am not awake, but my job is to avoid the evil spirit from getting into my heart, not to condemn the person which is occupied by the evil spirit.
Conciously or unconciously a man will make signals to his friends and family about things he experience. By instinct this will generate comfort from his friends or family, and in most cases this comfort makes him comfortable. If the situation was caused by sin in his flesh, he will loose the opportunity to deal with the sin if he accept this comfort. The song does not say that giving comfort is a bad thing, it says that each I must find out which comfort is for my spirit or for my flesh and then only accept the comfort for my spirit.
Of course this text and many other songtext can be twisted into ridiculous contexts, but if this text is scaring you, you should avoid reading even the Bible. In most countries there are maniacs having a walk with a wooden cross on their shoulder every morning - according to the word of Jesus about every day taking up the cross and follow him. Maybe you should read the "twisting book" recommended by John?
Dear Blogmaster:
You haven't even read the book recommended and you say it is a "twisting book"? Afraid to read a book other than Mr Smith's or Mr Bratlie's or your Lord and Master Kare Smith?
Of course, "everyone" outside of SF is filled with evil spirits and that is why SF teaches that its converts must stay away from their family members (outsiders) who are filled with evil spirits and may contaminate them. That is why the girl had to leave her "evil spirit" filled family and friends?
And then of course, other Christian books are "twisting books"!
Standard SF replies.
And as Sophie pointed out, anyone who questions SF or voices opinions is a "slanderer" or an "attacker"?
Paranoia! Pure and simple.
Also whenever texts that SF cultists have written as being "in error" are pointed to, they will return to some Norwegian translation or say SF people translated it "wrongly" to justify themselves.
Or as Zac Poonen alleged and examples of which are many - the SF is desperately trying to rewrite some of the writings of the earlier leaders' errors to make it more palatable (since now they are on a world mission - for they believe that when SF gospel is preached all over the world, the end will come -) for those they would like to deceive.
You are free to be arrogant in what you call "the truth". It is like the story of the man who claimed: Oh, I am so proud to be so humble.
And were you offended about the word "parrot" which someone who is "victorious over sin" ought not to be?
I did not call you a parrot but what I said was that SF cultists repeat the same things over and over again like "parrots", especially the same "proof texts".
So accept my apology - if you cannot distinguish between a metaphor and a similie, I must surely be at fault. And since surely you don't know English, I am doubly at fault. Sincere Apologies.
John:
Actually I have not access to the book you are recommending, and I would definately not have had time to read an entire book in 2 days. I am not afraid of reading anything about this case, but I am no superman. But if you can tell me where to download this book, I might read it.
If SF was afraid of the public critics, I wonder why do they publish a lot of the critics in "Brunstad Forum" which is telling the story of SF.
And thanks for making it clear I am not a parrot, I actually had my doubts too.
In fact, I have a lot of family outside SF and a lot of familiy inside SF. I appreciate your honest advice, but I don't find my family and friends outside SF to be evil. But since I still are well related to them and share a lot of time together with them, I just can't be a "hardcore" SF'er, or what?
I guess I must be a "slanderer" and "attacker" as I frequently voice my opinion in SF.
About the song: You mean that the SF founders were able to make the SF teaching because they did not know the Greek original texts, and that the Bible translation has twisted the gospel and made it possible to misunderstand. But at least it is very nice of you to say that the amateur translators in SF have translated all the songs without a single loss of the message.
To John:
Here I am, a 'hard core' SFer, asking you to share with me how you understand the Bible. I asked what the 'harlot,' that is written about in Revelations, means in this present day and age. Please take a moment to teach me. I am not being sarcastic, I am not mocking. Since I've grown up in the SF I don't know how 'mainstream' Christianity (the ones that memorize the Nicean Creed for example) understand and teach the 'harlot' in the book of Revelations.
I wasn't asking you to care what Sigurd Bratlie wrote in 'The Bride and the Harlot,' I was putting up his description as a foil (is that the right word?) to how you might describe the 'harlot.' So you can use his description to point out the differences in the SF (wrong) definition and the mainstream (right) definition.
I want to clarify my words regarding Pilgrim's Progress. The character Christian leaves (not literally, like you mentioned) his family... While it isn't a physical leaving, there is a separation in spirit and life interest. From the time he 'leaves' his family until the end of the book his family has no sway over the decisions he makes. He lives entirely with his face set towards the goal.
To All:
I would like to urge each one (especially myself) to act and write as they claim to be... Be Christian. This blog was meant to discuss SF and the possibility it is a cult and there are bound to be differences in opinions. That doesn't mean we should resort to virulence and dripping sarcasm.
I write this because I know that I am easily drawn to write negatively towards another author instead of writing to discredit or counter what another author has written. The way we treat our fellow man (whether we agree with them or not) shows how far we've come in following Jesus. Whether or not we remain as 'babes in Christ' or have begun to grow into mature Christians.
@Russian:"The way we treat our fellow man (whether we agree with them or not) shows how far we've come in following Jesus."
This is a good reminder for those participating in these discussions as well as for those on the sidelines reading along.
Wanted to share a link to an interesting op-ed piece which appeared a few weeks back in the Wall Street Journal, as food for thought for those interested:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052970203440104574398963953876266.html#articleTabs%3Darticle
May these discussions here enable us to grow and be more like Christ. Take Care.
I think I've been pretty nice lately?
@Blogmaster:
1. Scripture Twisting:
http://www.amazon.com/Scripture-Twisting-Twenty-Cults-Misread/dp/0877846111/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1254532539&sr=1-1
2. Correcting the Cults:
http://www.amazon.com/Correcting-Cults-Responses-Scripture-Twisting/dp/080106550X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1254532539&sr=1-2
I suggest you spend some money on re-examining your understanding of Scripture instead of spending it to build an earthly kingdom based on the denial of Christ's deity on earth.
@Chris:
Yes, it is complicated, isn't it? But the common thread is that:
(a) the five-year old girl is shielded from the "world" by her evangelical, conservative parents and (b) whatever fears their daughter has of them have been put in her head by evangelical Christians hostile to Islam!.
In other words, this kind of Christianity breeds FEAR.
It is this kind of FEAR that SF also instigates in its followers. On the one hand, they put this fear into the minds of the followers (the world is evil, the other churches are evil, Islam is evil, ONLY WE ARE ON THE RIGHT PATH. On the other they instigate a patting oneself on the back sort of "arrogance" as to the CERTAINTY OF THEIR BELIEF SYSTEM AS THE ONLY ONE RELEVANT TO ETERNAL LIFE as with Blogmaster.
This is the complication.
In SF most of the preaching is about FEAR - fear God, fear elder brothers and submit to them entirely, fear the world, fear sin, fear leaving the SF, fear reading other Christian books or going to other Christian meetings, fear other Christian preachers, fear the history of the universal church other than what is prescribed by SF, fear letting your children have and mix too much with unbelievers, etc.
If SF knew what Jesus meant when he said LOVE GOD, LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOUR LIKE YOURSELF, the fear that many have experienced and are experiencing but are silent about would disappear.
@RssanSpy:
1. How Bratlie has interpreted the "harlot" is important. He uses it as a universal plumb line to condemn all Christians as "harlots" except his own sect.
The more important issue is how he has twisted Scripture to DENY THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST WHILE ON EARTH. Once this happens, all other spirits enter in, spirits that "fly over" (as Blogmaster put it)from the East to Norway to teach SF how man can become God.
2. Yes, in Pilgrim's Progress, Christian was "whole-hearted" to use the SF terminology. But he did not make a young girl break ALL HER RELATIONSHIPS with her family and friends or teach Luke 14:25-26 to destroy family relationships and entrap people in an exclusive sect/cult. The Body of Christ does not do things like that!
@GivingittoGod:
Your hurting is sad and terrible. But can you try not to use the expressions that come easily to you? That is the accusation with which the "holy" people will hurt you some more. The strong ones are the ones who often attack and hurt and destroy the weak. But God can take care of you. It will take some time for the false teachings and spirits of the SF to leach away from you and for all the hurt your so-called "friends" in SF inflicted on you to be healed. Please be patient and the Lord and God Jesus Christ will bless you and redeem you entirely and may God help you and your husband get that vacation home. You deserve it after all you have suffered. God has heard your cries and tears even if your so-called "friends" in SF do not care and consider you a "harlot" and as one who is "dead".
@Blogmaster:
How can one get access to Brunstad Forum where you say critics are accepted?
Russian: Regarding Hymn #370, as far as I know that is the complete third verse of the hymn. That would mean that the context is complete. There are no other lines in the verse to change the context.
Blogmaster wants to say that the translation from Norwegian to English doesn’t convey the complete meaning. Hmmm, lets see, aren’t you the same guys who said the original Greek words and context of scripture are not important in studying the Bible? Since it is so easy to misinterpret this hymn, has SF made any effort to inform your English speaking members of this so that they understand the correct context of that hymn? If so, can you point us to that SF publication? I’m sure that John must have a copy of that somewhere in his archives.
I would really like to have that because we need to share it with this SF leader in Owasso. He hasn’t got the word yet.
On another topic, I feel that I need to clarify something relevant to this discussion. The idea of separating from your parents has been thrown around and I want to put that in context.
It is a normal course of growing up and reaching adulthood that young people would move out of their parent’s home in order to establish their own independence and make their own homes. That is normal. Nobody here has an issue with that. This girl’s family is no different. They helped her move into the dorm at school in order for her to start that process.
What is NOT normal is for her to secretly leave the dorm and move into the home of this SF leader that very night, and then to tell her father shortly after that she can’t come home because she was afraid that she would be harmed. There was no reason for her to fear her parents! That is a behavior she learned from this “church” while living with them. She wasn’t afraid of her parents when she left home. That idea planted in her mind has nothing to do with the Bible and she learned it from Smith’s Friends. Obviously this must be basic elemental teaching of SF. So can you show me in the Bible where this behavior is taught?
Russian, I agree with your statement:
“The point is that family relationships should not, should never, come between a Christian and his/her calling to be saved, part of the body of Christ, among the Bride of Christ in the rapture, etc...”
I believe that our loyalty should be with Christ first, and then our family, and then our church, in that order. My own parents are not believers, but I continue to be their child. I have not divorced them and I am not afraid of them. I spend as much time with them as I can, holidays, vacations, etc. and I pray that someday they will become believers. The point is that I am still very much involved in their lives.
However in this context you are equating this girl’s association with SF and the fact that she moved into the home of her school teacher, and her fear of being harmed by her CHRISTIAN parents, with her being saved and now being part of the body of Christ. By making this statement you have just elevated Smith’s Friends to the status of the ONLY CHRISTIANS ON THE PLANET!!!
You keep trying to deny this belief but then you write it out for everyone to read. You have just proven what you are and what you believe and it all fits with the observed behavior of this local group.
Your last post was a nice change but I remain skeptical. I believe that this is another ploy to change the focus of this discussion away from the behaviors of the local SF group.
Funnyman: You said:
“If there are tares...pull them out. Do so. Bring them to the notice of the SF. Have you been mistreated? Bring it out.”
This blog has brought these behaviors to the notice of SF and, so far, no SF member has shown any remorse for this girl’s family, except for you. You seem to be a reasonable person and wish to improve the image of your “church”. I applaud you for that, and invite you to start here in Owasso. If this group’s behavior is contrary to SF teaching then call them out. Let your SF leadership know so that corrections can be made. Do the right thing.
Words are cheap and actions speak louder than words.
Giving It to God: Yes, you are doing better; keep it up. Thanks.
Harold:
Unfortunately, I have no such thing in my archives. Simply because the SF does not clarify such matters to its English-speaking crowd. In any case, SF does not need to clarify such things because the English-speaking SF blindly trust the Norwegians and their "work".
Some points in this context:
1. SF has a written history and written texts. St Augustine noted that all "heretics" have written texts that ensure their own condemnation. There is a "history of texts and a history of building the sect.(The Brunstad Forum, for instance, set up in 2008, is a high-tech attempt to create a multimedia history of the SF to reinforce the belief system of SF followers.)
2. SF also (and this is the other side of the coin of deception) has an esoteric, word of mouth, oral tradition through which much gets done practically on the ground. So if someone has to be ostracised, there is no announcement - the leading brothers will pass the word around and soon the person will EXPERIENCE being isolated - it is a terrible experience for those who put all their trust (like GivingittoGod) in the "brotherhood" and the intention is to "break the will" of the person and make him or her see that "Christ is crushing you so you can either fit into the building or be cast out". Similarly, many legends and miraculous events ascribed to the "holy" brothers are circulated so that people come to a blind faith in them, whether they are dead or living. It is the Catholic system of saint-worship brought to SF followers "live".
3. If you read the texts carefully and observe the SF behaviour carefully (if they ever let you do that), you will notice how both these work together to "seal" the "sect" in. The leaders are trained to do this from a young age and are extremely adept at doing this.
4. Leadership in the SF is also not what it seems. The leader you see up front may not be the real leader(s) who lies "under the covering" or "hidden". Except in Brunstad where Kare Smith is equated with the Pope and his "council of ministers" equated to the "college of Cardinals".
5. The SF, from what people within inform, is involved in mustering a massive evangelistic, mission "putsch" now across the world, especially in areas like India, Africa and South America where nobody knows about them. They expect this to bring in a whole lot of members. America is also on this list but the SF is wary because here it knows that the "harlot" Christians will oppose its moves. But in conjunction with this plan, the SF is desperately cleaning up its act to present a "beautiful image" to the world and the "harlots" and "unbelievers" In SF lingo, they want to move from being "hidden" to being "the city set upon a hill". But the hidden agenda always will be to slowly indoctrinate its members that SF IS THE ONLY TRUE CHURCH and ONLY SF HAS THE TRUE DOCTRINE.
Blogmaster is right in saying that the Brunstad-based businesses are
generating profits but these are profits meant to bring many, many innocents into the SF fold by means of their projection as a non-denominational evangelistic church.
Which is why I keep coming back to their texts and their doctrines - these cannot be hidden and they WILL NOT BE REPUDIATED by the SF leadership. As St Augustine said, "heretics always expose themselves by writing out their heresies". So whatever FACE SF puts up before the world, the inner core will always abide by the twisted teachings while, as a leader of the SF said, the "outer court grows bigger".
In other words, so long as the "core" controls the "outer court" all is well with the SF business.
Just had a quick browse.
what are sophie and givingittogod doing on here?? What disturbs me is the amount of time they have wasted, and this looks like it has been going on for months, and months!
sophie is whining about the same old thing in every post - (why not just put it all into one post and leave it at that?)
(givingittogod - what are you rambling on about??? Take a step back and read through what you've written as if you were someone else..)
go on, get out there, leave the past behind and live life to the full!!
just my 2 cents worth.
@observer: why are you so concerned about what sophie and givingittogod are doing with their time?
Without the intent of being sarcastic, I’d like to point out a simple contradiction within SF belief concerning evil spirits. From the words in the song presented earlier, they believe that evil spirits hover around us. God’s Word teaches us about satan and his attempts to lure us away from Jesus Christ. It warns us about satan masquerading as an angel of light (2 Cor.11:14). The Bible also teaches that we, as Christians, are to put our armor on for the spiritual battles we face while living on this earth (Ephesians 6:l). So, it should be obvious to believers that there are spiritual battles and decisions we face daily.
Satan’s goal is to turn as many Christians away from worshipping, honoring, glorifying God and Jesus Christ as possible. He likes to get us to do his work which is sin (lie, steal, gossip, hate, be prideful, be divisive, dishonor and hurt others with our words and actions, use our bodies in ways that are damaging), anything he can in order to get us to sin, because in so doing, we are NOT worshipping, honoring, or glorifying God. Satan loves it when he can do anything to turn people away from the One and Only True God who manifested Himself to come down from heaven as a ransom for ALL mankind.
So, wouldn’t these demonic ‘evil spirits’ be everywhere? Why place emphasis on ‘family and friends’ using persuasion? Wouldn’t these same evil spirits be ready to tempt us where we work or recreate? This man teaches in a public school classroom, so wouldn’t evil spirits be there also?
Funnyman said: “I would agree with you Sophie that the SF is just like any other denomination. However many in the SF are in a state of denial about this fact. This may partly be because the SF is in a transition from an unorganized loosely knit group into an organized group. One of the faults that is more peculiar but not limited to the SF is its exclusiveness. However that does not make it a cult. I have seen exclusiveness in other churches too. Although they may not go so far as to say that they are the only body of Christ many definitely do feel that they are better off than other groups. This attitude is not limited to the SF.”
Funnyman, you and I agree on many points, but I didn’t say that ‘SF is just like any other denomination’. What I said was, “But, then that would make the SF organization just like all the other ‘HARLOT’ CHURCHES’ (except for the fact that their leadership has no formal theological training).
My point is that part of SF M.O. is criticizing and pointing fingers at what they see wrong in Christians who do not belong to SF and they call them ‘harlots’. Although SF claims to desire to become more Christ-like, it is really no different from those they criticize. Isn’t that being hypocritical? At least those within mainstream congregations admit they are sinners and in need of a ‘propitiation’ for their sins. Other Christian believers’ agenda is to bring people to Christ Jesus, not criticizing and pointing out faults of other Christians or ‘body of believers’. Christians join together in a common purpose and that is to teach the Word of God and bring those who are lost to Christ, not necessarily to our church congregation, but to Christ Jesus and the salvation that rests in Him and Him Alone.
Several on here have been trying to make the point that original languages ARE important in translations and for us to be able to understand what an original text means. And some posting from within SF have claimed that understanding and knowing the original languages is not important. Yet when words from one of their own songs are brought into question, they want to use the translation argument?
The words to this song, along with their vehement teaching of Luke 14:26 (when used out of context and in conjunction with all the other SF divisive teachings) such as words from JO Smith’s writings: “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.” And, “Be not afraid of God’s Word that divides and separates. Go out from the harlot!” and “It means to forsake family, your possessions, and your own life”.
These types of teachings will and have caused people to separate from their own family and their own friends. And, these are just some of the teachings we’re aware of. There’s probably more.
So, SF is teaching and is in favor of divisiveness as long as it’s to one’s own family and friends.
Christianity teaches love, hope, forgiveness, reconciliation, truth, grace, mercy, salvation, kindness, patience, restoration, faith.
"observer" I'm here cause I want a front row seat when this church is totaled via their twisted interpretations of god's word. They really hurt me a slew I deserve a front row seat. And I am getting counseling but it will take many years of counseling for me to be able to "move on with my life" they really screwed me up.
For Sophie,
Sorry to have misquoted you. However I think I agree with the thrust of your statements that the SF is being like the people they criticize.
I will post in detail later.
It's not a grudge anymore. I have 0 friends, I've had 0 friends for years since leaving this group, I seriously have lost the ability to trust anyone. They hurt me a lot I want to see this group crash and burn, they shouldn't get away with destroying people's lives like this, I keep my blog up in hopes that some people won't go to this cult after reading my blog, that somebody out there could be spared all the pain I went through. This cult destroyed my life I am not sure I can even recover at all at this point! So I disagree I don't think it is a grudge. And there must've been a order from some brother to all of salem fellowship to shun me - they all always acted really really funny around me. I'm saying my life has been destroyed via this cult, I not sure I can recover at all I don't have hope for that being a option - though I am in counseling, I'm not hopeful about it. And I'm frustrated when smith's friends cult members tell me go get counseling get on with your life, well it ain't going to be that simple of a process you all destroyed my life!
To John:
You wrote two things,
Oct 1. What does it matter what Sigurd Bratlie thought or wrote?
Oct 2. How Bratlie has interpreted the "harlot" is important.
Could you explain what you mean by these two opposing statements made 1 day apart?
I would appreciate if you could answer my questions. I asked if you could review what I said about McCormicks Impeccability essay and how you (mainstream Christianity) understand the harlot (and the beast) in Revelations.
I asked Sophie and Harold the same question regarding the harlot, but since they usually take more time to respond I'm willing to wait.
To givingittogod:
It is impossible to say, "I am a Christian" and at the same time hold a grudge against another person or group. Jesus Christ never held a grudge. Jesus taught that we are to 'turn the other cheek' when we are wronged. An exhortation to you would be to repent of your grudge and truly forgive SF.
It doesn't take years of counseling to forgive and do what Jesus would do. That can happen in an instant. "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you.." Matthew 5.
I've been praying that the smith's friends break apart and go into mainstream christianity where they can be saved for years! These days I also pray that you all be delivered from the demon in control of your pagan cult. And since leaving the smith's friends I have sent them money so I have made a effort to do good to my enemies.
If someone murders you are you going to love them? Or murder your kids, or whatever? NO! Forgiveness will be in a measure in that event. You murdered me smith's friends, you took away my trust of everyone. Before I went to your church I was a happy sane normal person ----- you all abused me so much I don't think I'm going to ever recover it's been years since I left this cult.
You wouldn't fully forgive someone that murdered your husband or kids, you just wouldn't. The crime is there, not going to raise some whew hoo that was holy flag! It's murder! Not holy!
Seriously the smith's friends should be offering to fork out serious cash for me to get counseling right now, it get me out of your hair. I need $1,000's of dollars of counseling with a cult exit specialist and I can't afford it myself!
I can't recover I try but I have no friends, no family supporting me.....I don't have the things that people need to recover, and no money to be able to afford the expensive cult exit counselor's. That's no family, no friends, no money. And I was murdered by this cult, they didn't love me none.
And how am I supposed to love you smith's friends cult members when none you ever reply to my e-mails - well hardly ever? You all dropped me like a disease when I left you church, when I left and went back to help out aka do good to my enemies, i was excorted around the property like a criminal and given dirty looks every which way I went ----- which isn't different then a normal day at that cult for me. But I can love you as cuddly demonic cactuses, you are cuddly demonic cactuses and you have no control over your demonic estate so your as cuddly as your going to be, being that your all so demon possessed!
RssanSpy and Observer:
Your "attack" on GivingittoGod is TYPICAL SF tack. The cult beats down people and as soon as the victims of the cult voice their hurt and the brutality they suffered inside the cult, the loyal cult members call this "whining" or spout Scripture to the victims or take them to law courts to harass them or threatens them with physical violence as in Owasso.
But you can be sure that there is a reckoning with God down the line even if you want to harass GivingittoGod for telling it as she has experienced it.
RssanSpy:
Please do not try to divert the discussion from this cult's behaviour and its false doctrines to Bratlie's interpretation of the "harlot" and what "harlots" think of it.
I meant that his interpretation is "important" in a negative sense. As it is this interpretation which is used by the cult to label all other Christians as "harlots". So Bratlie's interpretation is possibly evil" and comes from an "evil spirit" masquerading as an "angel of light" as Sophie well understands.
Jesus never went around calling others "harlots" which is why Bratlie doesn't count in the light of the Gospel Jesus brought which was salvation and peace and happiness for harlots. Jesus also did not use cult tactics to wreck the lives of people like GivingittoGod and then say that she is "whining" or that she should "forgive" those who tried to destroy her "will" and life itself.
There is no need for GivingittoGod to forgive a cult that has harmed her psychologically. Instead, she should take this case to the Lord's court ("The Lord judge between you and me") and wait for His verdict on this.
In fact, even if they get away with their evil work on earth, in eternity the SF is going to have to face its judgment for twisting the Gospel of Jesus Christ, creating a cult, judging other Christians as "harlots" and destroying the lives of many believers.
To John and givingittogod:
What both of you are saying is: because of circumstance X the commandments God gave us through Jesus and His apostles do not apply. This is never the case. Do not try to condone the (or your) lack of Christ-like behavior and say 'it was the other guy's fault.' OF COURSE there is a need for forgiveness if givingittogod is ever to lead a life pleasing to God.
John:
Regarding 'The cult beats down people and as soon as the victims of the cult voice their hurt and the brutality they suffered inside the cult, the loyal cult members call this "whining" or spout Scripture to the victims or take them to law courts to harass them or threatens them with physical violence as in Owasso.'
--observer wrote that Sophie was 'whining.' Sophie has not experienced anything first-hand from SF. Please take more care to keep the facts straight.
Regarding this 'harlot' topic. The thought has come to me that you are skirting the issue and don't want to answer the question. I am sincere. I want to know how mainstream Christianity understands the harlot and the beast written about in the book of Revelations. I figure that you are just the one to help me understand because you've had so much to say about how wrong Bratlie was about the topic.
I also believe that if you do a good enough job of teaching/explaining you could strike a major blow against the foundation of SF. After reading all of your posts there isn't much you wouldn't write to do exactly that.
Regarding 'Jesus never went around calling others "harlots"'
--All throughout the 4 Gospels Jesus preaches against the Pharisees. He calls them 'brood of vipers, hypocrites, adulterers, etc.' Read Matthew 16 for example. The Pharisees were mixing the law and their own desires and Jesus hated it. While Jesus never used the word 'harlot' to describe the Pharisees I don't see how the word wouldn't fit. So your claim regarding Jesus actions doesn't hold.
Your church has forgiven me even less then whatever amount I've forgiven you cause I've tried to e-mail your cult members and they don't reply to my e-mails..........so I'm more christian I win basically. I try to love you all, I do. But there's limits I ain't going to go to your church I'm done with being brainwashed for this lifetime and I do believe and so does my husband that your church members would "ruff me up" or maybe give me another lovely "talk" it just wouldn't be fun it never is going to that cult for me.
I be as nice as I can be on this blog that's what I'm currently doing, while I sit on my nice comfy front row seat watching your church self destruct, I have a bag of popcorn I'm eating to : ) (and I have family but they aren't that involved in my life, my parents right now are in arizona buisy having the time of their lives - like they pry moving there) my family like isn't like close at all. But it's not having any friends that harder on me, many days I just break down and cry. I'm hoping the sorrority will e-mail me back today, so I can go to their tea tonight, I'm trying to get out and mingle with the people : )
I was hurt a slew by this cult a slew a slew the pain is still fresh, alive. I'm on the road to healing but that's a long long road and I know it is.
it has been establish on this blog that this church doesn't do any good works outside of themselves, don't do much of anything past building fancy churches - with I've been told the exception of their church in africa - I've been told by the inside that they doing much good to their cult members in africa that are poor. If a churches works are dead - how the entire group going to be doing? 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," There is such a thing as "Dead works" in my opinion raising money for brunstad via pge and rosegarden like smith's friends cult near me in doing - DEAD WORKS!!!!!!! You smith's friends cult members can't forgive me or love me as much as I love you which I know is me comparing a beans and beans but I love you more my beans are greater. Faith without works is dead.......but there also is such a thing as dead works. Living works is to love you fellow man......give to the poor not just to be doing the good with love in your heart...with love.....James 1:27 "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." Pure religion is about love, it's not about ewwwwwwww bad bad person you did this and that and that and that. I have a heart for the poor these days that I didn't have when I was with the smith's friends, and I'm glad of that. I don't want to suck up all the supplies of this earth, take take take........I want to be a giver...........I want to leave a legacy......I want people to have good things to say about me when I die ------ but most importantly I want to love people! Let jesus's light shine out from me, to everyone! that's the goal anyways : )
Dear RussnSpy,
It appears to me that you find it easy to locate what is wrong with givingittogod’s life, yet you do not seem to see the lacks that are present in the group that you fellowship with. Or are you able to sense a lack or deficiency within the SF? If you do actually sense a lack, what is the great need to cover it up? Is it to preserve some sort of unity? Clearly, the attitudes of many in your group have served to damage, not heal, givingittogod, to a point where she is undergoing counseling. God is able to heal, with or without the SF, but clearly God is choosing somebody else to do it, not your group of believers.
I myself have encountered attitudes like yours in the SF. When a person is considered on the ‘inside’ the group, what applies is the adage that the problem is with yourself and your own thought patterns, and not with the other person. When the person that you are dealing with is considered to be on the ‘outside’, should the adage then reverse?. I have been to many SF meetings myself. I remember a message given by Arild Tombre where he was saying about working with people. He was talking about what happens when the person you want to work with does not realize what you are doing. He said that then you must humble yourself. What if the person does not realize even then? Then you must humble yourself some more, he said. I think he repeated this a third time to stress how deeply one must humble oneself to break through in this situation. Yet, your attitude in blaming givingittogod (advising - almost demanding her to forgive), who is clearly trying to get out of a scarring experience in her life, smells of insensitivity and borderline arrogance, not humility. Perhaps you are/were unable to do anything good in her situation. Why do harm? You have been quick to defend the ‘goodness’ of the SF church. If indeed you think that givingittogod has been wronged by someone in the SF group, perhaps you can offer an apology instead of demanding that she be the one to forgive.
(to be cont)
(cont - to rssnspy6)
It is easy to have a disdain for these ‘worldly’ techniques of counseling, self-help, books by ‘mainstream’ Christians, etc. Yet clearly, your own techniques of demanding forgiveness have clearly not borne much fruit. I think a lot of it comes from this desire to distinguish yourself from this ‘world’. I think you justify your treatment of others perhaps by justifying all this by defining the term 'harlot' appropriately, I do not know. I think that so long as you desire to be a spiritual somebody, you will continue damaging people’s lives. Perhaps all this has happened unknowingly, but your attitude is showing me that you are not even willing to acknowledge the other side.
I am not attacking the SF. I have had lot of good experiences with them as well. I am merely critiquing certain thought patterns that I observed as well, and which have been reinforced by various contributors of this blog. I have a question for you. Have you ever had an experience where you felt isolated from your loved ones because of your views? Your parents, your children, your closest friends? Yes, you might have had differing views/opinions but have you ever been ostracized by a group that you had formed strong ties with? Have you ever experienced or went through the agonies of being separated and isolated from the brotherhood. I think you stated here that you were born and raised in the church. You have had some exposure to 'mainstream' churches. You spoke of your parents experience of breaking away from their social group to come to SF. But have you, - you personally - ever experienced how it felt to be an outsider within the SF church? I do not think so. You will be and have been in a comfortable, familiar setting as your parents, siblings, older ones that have seen you grow up within the system are all there. There is nothing wrong with this experience or existence. However, it will be very difficult for you to see/relate to those who speak of their experiences of how it feels to be isolated/treated like an outsider within the SF system. Thus, you defend the church very fervently without really getting to understand the other side.
Think on these things.
TM
even if the smith's friends develop some compassion towards me : ) it's to late for me - not outsiders in their church though I can't be the only one shunned like that. After leaving their church, I blacked out in my mind what happened I can't remember all I remember is it involved my parents and they were taking my brothers side when he was the one that did stuff wrong and they should've been on my side - anyways I lost my mind, really, I started hallucinating stuffs all the time. I think the pain and hurt the smith's friends caused me hating me like they did is more then any appology or any amount of love could ever be made up for. Everyone close to me abused and/or betrayed me, I have my husband and my kids, I have a mental illness now that makes me distrust everyone and have little reason to trust anyone. My mom to this day dumps just dumps on me in e-mails.....my husband reads all my e-mails and doesn't really tell me details I've set up my communication with my parents this way cause I can't mentally handle the abuse anymore......and I really can't. But I'm used to you all abusing me. The sorrority never e-mailed me back, I don't get to go to the tea tonight : ( Thinking I might do foam sword fighting in the park next weekend that's like social uh activity it counts!
RssanSpy:
You cannot make Jesus into an SF cultist however much you turn your head and arguments upside down.
By your argument, do you mean to say that all other Christians are Pharisees and therefore you are free to call them "harlots"?
Further, I do not even care to strike a death blow at SF. Jesus did not come to destroy and I follow Him. People on this blog are simply God's witnesses to what is going on in the SF.
As Harold has said: The judgement is going to come from God. Many of us are praying and those PRAYERS HAVE BEEN HEARD and God is sending the answers even now so that those who love Jesus will be redeemed from this cult and others will be kept from this cult.
It is God who judges and not man.
Giving it to God: You and I live no where close to one another. I don’t know anything about you other than what you’ve written on here. From reading your posts, it sounds as if you’ve had some pain, hurt, and disappointment in your life. But, you are a beautiful person and God obviously thinks you are something very special or He wouldn’t have created you. He put you here for a purpose.
People are sinners; we will disappoint others and be disappointed with others from time to time. The Bible teaches us to love, obey, glorify, and worship God and Jesus and to love, respect, honor, our family: our husbands, our wives, our children, our moms and dads, our grandparents, our cousins, aunts, uncles, etc. and love our friends.
It doesn’t say to be critical, judgmental, and backbiting, keeping a record of wrongs. It says to forgive, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you. The Omniscient God also sees and knows the hurt you’ve endured and still feel. He knows you’re only human and have human emotion; after all He’s the One who created you. He knows your weaknesses and your strengths. The Bible says that He loves you and His desire is for ALL to come to rest and trust in Him. Just know that’s why we need to place our hope and trust in God rather than in man; man has the ability to disappoint because all mankind is fallible. I’m sorry you’ve been hurt and disappointed by man. (Not so sure your mental illness wasn’t induced.) God doesn’t promise us that our lives on this earth will be without pain and perfect, but that when we are hurt or go through sad, disappointing, tough, hard, painful times, God and His enduring love will always be there. It is THE ONE constant thing in our lives. Praise God for His unfailing love!! He will get you through.
You still have the right to share what this group who claims to be Christian has done to you. Maybe in so doing, you’ll spare someone else the same pain. May God truly bless you.
To atanomellon:
Thank you for joining the conversation. I'll try to answer your concerns the best I can.
'It appears to me that you find it easy to locate what is wrong with givingittogod’s life...'--I have first-hand experience with givingittogod. I attended meetings in the same fellowship with her for a number of years. By attended I mean that I was there, but she rarely was. This was covered in a previous post to which she acknowledged that 'what I said about her was true.' So she claims 10+ years of 'affiliation' but didn't take the time to really make friends. I was not there when the tie between SF and her was severed, but I will give an educated guess at why it happened. Her infrequent attendance of functions coupled with her mental illness (and possibly her limited understanding of what SF teaches) led to a general demand that 'she get hers' (available in her posts).
So while I don't know much about her life now (besides what she voluminously posts here) I do know (somewhat) how she got where she is.
'...yet you do not seem to see the lacks that are present in the group that you fellowship with.'--Whether I see the lacks or not hasn't been the question on this blog. The question has been whether or not the doctrinal teachings of SF are cultic. I can say, from my own perspective/judgement/wisdom, that there are lacks in SF, but they are due to people and not doctrine. In time people either become conformed to the doctrine or leave, which alleviates the lacks. Is the doctrine perfect? I believe it is the gospel of Jesus, so it must be. Handled by a person it might have been misused due to the person.
'what is the great need to cover it up?'--I do not 'cover up' by not addressing it. I have been occupied with the previous question of 'SF is a cult.'
Regarding givingittogod--I cannot say whether or not (or how much) SF was at fault (in the wrong) vs. she was at fault (in the wrong). This is something that will have to wait until Judgement.
'Yet, your attitude in blaming givingittogod (advising - almost demanding her to forgive)'--Read my previous post on givingittogod's involvement with the SF (I tried to find it to make it easy for you but couldn't). Since I was not there at the end of her SF experience (even when she began posting on this blog she wavered back and forth between whether or not SF was good or right or mean and unfriendly--SF definitely had the right doctrine in her eyes earlier) I cannot comment on it as much as I 'd like to. Regarding the verses I shared with her... I am encouraging her to bring her life into accordance with God's word. Whether she forgives those in SF that 'hurt' her or doesn't forgive has no bearing upon me. But her worth in Jesus' eyes goes up tremendously when she cleanses out what she has against SF. So far some other posters have written something to the effect, "it will be ok, God loves you, SF will get what is coming to them. We are sorry to hear your pain..." But no spiritual food for her, just pity party. Bluntly said. I want it to go well for her but I know it can't as long as she holds her grudge against SF. How worthwhile is my apology? I did not wrong her. I am here representing myself and my experience with SF, not as a spokesman for SF. Apologizing on behalf of SF is not my place. It is unfortunate if she was treated poorly as she claims, and that should not go on in SF. I do doubt that things happened exactly as she claims.
To atanomellon: Continued
You mentioned a message given by Arild Tombre. I agree with his message completely, how can I not? But we are not 'working' with anyone here on this blog, we are discussing whether or not SF is a cult.
'It is easy to have a disdain for these ‘worldly’ techniques of counseling, self-help, books by ‘mainstream’ Christians, etc.'--I agree with counseling, especially in mental illness cases. Since I, and SF, believe in a Peccable Jesus, and most of 'mainstream' believes in an Impeccable Jesus, I don't see how reading those books would benefit me in my faith... Correct me if I'm wrong on that.
'I think that so long as you desire to be a spiritual somebody, you will continue damaging people’s lives. Perhaps all this has happened unknowingly'--I do not desire a to be a spiritual somebody. I want to live a life of a disciple of Jesus. Where do you come from saying I am 'damaging peoples lives'? The attitude you read from this blog (what you read) may have given you the opinion that I am 'insensitive and arrogant' which is not the 'smell' I want to give off. I will try to stop sending out that feeling.
Regarding 'ostracized'--I have not experienced what you described. I have gone through highschool (which is the most peer-pressured place on the planet) (not in the Bible-belt where being 'Christian' is the norm and there are churches on 'every' street corner) as a Christian and felt the reproach of being different. 'Why don't you do this, or go to that, or say that..' etc. I know what it is to not fit into a group, 'the' group. It isn't the SAME as the situation you described, but it is in the same field.
atanomellon, thank you for your questions. I don't think you understand what I'm about and have made a lot of assumptions into my character. I am willing to talk about these topics further if you'd like.
To John:
It is not my intention to 'make Jesus into an SF cultist.' It is my intention for you to explain to the blog the questions I reasonably asked.
My argument does not extend to all Christians. It extends to Jesus calling the Pharisees horrible names for what they were. Don't impute words to my keyboard. Not 'all other Christians' are harlots. There are many, both inside and outside SF, that do not take the calling to be Jesus' disciple seriously (daily) and will end up like those in the parable of the wedding (they were cast out into darkness because they did not have a wedding garment). This is partly where you are wrong about Bratlie's The Bride and the Harlot. If you would just answer the questions I posed to you earlier there would be much more clarity on this blog.
RssanSpy:
I think you are the "teacher" here and the "expert" on how "perfect" the SF, its doctrines and its behaviour are.
You know what your kind of attitude is known as?
Super-spirituality.
Hyper-holiness.
Sorry, you are just fooling yourself if you think you can learn anything from anyone outside of your cult.
Stay brainwashed and arrogant.
It might do you good to "think on the things" atamellon put out here.
But, of course, you are "perfect" so he cannot be of any help to you.
Observer:
By the way, do not ask others to follow Jesus the way SF cultists follows Jesus. The SF follows a "sinner" Christ and we follow the true Lord and God "who is from above and above all".
It is pointless trying to tell anything to a cultist as he or she has been brainwashed from childhood to despise other humans and "harlots".
You are a good example of this too. And in the end, the views of an SF cultist is indeed worth only 2 cents.
Dear RssnSpy6,
I want to urge you to treat givingittogod and her situation with sensitivity. You are convinced that you know what will work for her, so did a lot of others in the SF assembly, probably. Drowning the person in the ‘truth’ is not a solution. You will just be following the way of the Pharisees who put heavy burdens on people’s shoulders but will not lift a finger to move it. You are revealing yourself to be a very immature person by criticizing someone who is trying to get out of a difficult situation. This SF school-of-hard-knocks mentality might work with many, but certainly not with all. How would you deal with the ones who do not work well in that system? Do they deserve your consideration in any way? You are conducting yourself as a soldier but against the wrong enemy. You have defined harlot to include everyone except the SF. It is like in Guantanamo Bay. There need be no respect for the rights of ‘enemy combatants’, correct? And then, as you mention, she doesn’t come to your meetings anymore , so whatever spiritual responsibility you ‘felt’ is over now. So I do not blame you. Another thing I found curious is your ‘educated guess’. You guess that her infrequent attendance of functions as a contributing factor. You implicate yourself and your friends to be people who only care about the ones who attend your ‘functions’ regularly. You show yourself to be pedestrian, not very spiritually enlightened.
I am not asking you to divulge all the lacks in your fellowship. But what is one to conclude if there is a disconnect between the doctrine and the behavior of the people? What would you conclude? Would one of the conclusions be that the flavor of gospel you are peddling does not work as intended? What is the use of discussing a doctrine’s goodness if the fruits do not shine through its followers? You clearly make that conclusion about ‘mainstream’ Christianity and their lack of spiritual food.
I am not interested in finding fault in any party. You state that you think givingittogod is ill. Does it make sense to pile on? How would you deal with this situation if this were your daughter or wife? I didn't mean that you should apologize. I used the word ‘you’ loosely to denote the SF. You have advocated the SF viewpoint. Your escape route is that the doctrine works, but the people screwed up, so you do not need to defend the people. Perhaps..but then you have to wonder about the efficacy of the doctrine itself. But the people become shining examples of a doctrine if their lives show the fruits, right? Can you have it both ways?
You are right that this is a discussion about whether SF is a cult or not. Then what business do you have attacking givingittogod and saying that she is mentally ill and that it is her fault that she doesn’t have any friends in the SF? I have been on the sidelines, watching this debate for some time. I even posted a long time ago, in support of the SF. I rejoined this discussion only because I felt you are unfairly treating givingittogod, and in the process, defending all kinds of inconsiderate deeds by your friends. Again, if you are defending the SF, my usage of the word you is as a collective. I did not mean that you are personally wrecking people’s lives. But certainly putting blame and guilt on someone who is trying to get out of a rut does not seem very ‘nurturing’.
TM
To John:
My intention when I respond to your post(s) is to either poke holes in your painting of the SF or to use my experience and understanding of the SF (which was stated in my first post) to counter what you've written. I don't mean for my attitude to come off as 'super-spiritual' or 'hyper-holy' and just today was given a reminder (from atanomellon) to review my attitude. My attitude is a work in progress and my intent is for what I write to be palatable (attitude-wise) for all.
Regarding your refusal to answer questions--
While I would be the one your answer is directed to there are many others observing that would benefit from your teaching. If I am 'brainwashed' and 'arrogant', yet I'm asking (nigh onto pleading) for you to teach me (which you won't) how am I supposed to get deprogrammed? I would think that you'd get satisfaction from helping me see the light. I am not perfect. I still have much to learn...
Does anyone else (anyone reading this blog) understand why John won't teach me by answering my questions? He championed McCormick's impeccability essay--I asked a question. He said Bratlie was wrong and 'evil' in his description of the 'harlot' in his book--I asked a question. Help me.
To atanomellon:
I understand more now that givingittogod and her situation need to be treated sensitively. I am not the one with the grace to handle her situation, obviously. I am convinced that I do not know what will work for her, but I do know that the Bible is true. Thank you for your 'school of hard knocks' analogy because that is who I am by nature... Which doesn't help in a situation like givingittogod's.
Regarding the ones that do not work in the 'system' you mentioned.--
Answering for myself here, not as a 'leader' in SF (which I'm not)... (My opinion here cannot be equated to what is taught by SF in this situation. This is my own opinion.) I believe that those that don't 'fit in' to SF do so because they are either too proud to humble themselves under the 'leaders' or too selfish to understand what it takes to be part of a 'brotherhood.' For example, an older sibling of mine left SF when (s)he turned 18 and moved out of my parents home. To this day (s)he won't go back to SF on account of pride... Even though the wisdom of time has showed her/him that the SF rules (of the time) were right and proper (as opposed to oppressive and ridiculous as (S)he first thought). Now when it comes to mental illness (which I attributed to givingittogod because she acknowledged it and Sophie referred to it) I have no answer except 'get the professional help needed.'
I have not defined 'harlot' to mean everyone except SF... John has. John attributed this definition to SF because he didn't share Bratlie's first few pages of The Bride and the Harlot (in which Bratlie writes that any person, not church/denomination, that mixes the 'world' with God's word is a member of the Harlot).
To atanomellon: Continued
'You guess that her infrequent attendance of functions as a contributing factor. You implicate yourself and your friends to be people who only care about the ones who attend your ‘functions’ regularly.'--One of givingittogod's first statements was that she lived quite far away and did not go very often. Then she immediately said that SF wouldn't allow her into 'the brother's ring' (referencing a song that was sung often at the time). I made the argument that if it isn't important enough to go (as she alluded to) and when she went she would sit in the back and never interact, then how could she feel any kind of kinship or friendship with any of the other 'members?' There were women that were friendly to her. She mentioned 3 of them by name and I know of others that made time for her. There is a much bigger picture to this situation. SF is built on testimonies of the members. She never did (that I can remember) and when I asked her about it earlier she did not contradict me. I don't know what caused the division between SF and givingittogod. I'm only sharing what I know and what is most likely.
What is the disconnect between doctrine and behavior that you are referring to?
I'm not sure I undstand what you mean by, "Can you have it both ways?" when referring to the doctrine.
I agree that it is not my business to 'attack' givingittogod. I don't think I've done that. In her posting journey here at Watwuzithinkin she has written quite a bit about SF that I felt was untrue. So I posted to counter what she wrote. I may not have written what I meant to say in the best way but that is something that I am working with.
the smith friend talking about me is really making me made right now.........cause I e-mailed anna and yelena I wanted to be their friends so bad and those people just shut me out!!!!!!! I seriously saw them many a weekend at the mall anna and sara and saroj and yelena, and they never invited me, I wanted to be friends with this group of people I tried hard, I e-mailed yelena and anna like diahrea. They wouldn't let me in. This church wouldn't let me in!
And I did sit alone at church most the time, I went very frequently to this church for the first few years I was there. But once I got married and moved 1 1/2 hours away it was harder to make it to the meetings, with 2 kids, it just got harder to do - not to mention when gas got up to $3 a gallon + it got really expensive. I always felt shut out, there was this immense feeling of family at this church, but I always felt left out and shut out, so I didn't try that much ----- I never felt welcome at all!
Granted yes I have a mental disorder of which I have been involved with NAMI slews, and see a therapist every 6 months, and take my meds everyday. But mental disordered people's still can be abused, I don't think my abuse is imaginary, or that I should be discounted, and why would I have such a huff for so many years after leaving this cult if nothing ever happened bad to me and it was all hunky dory. I didn't feel welcome at this church at all. I was shut out I swear. The door was slammed in my face from day 1. I didn't see that cause I was doing through some mental disordered buisiness - but now I do.
Here I have 0 friends, and pretty much no family and this cult has to shoot down my character as well like this --- it's just not right!
why don't you just come over and murder me and finish it e-mail me for my address to kill me I'll buy you the gun even.....
sheriwalz@gmail.com
At my current mainstream christian church they are warm they smile, I really pick up that vibe, I'm glad your here - that something. There many times I'd go to salem fellowship nobody would say hi to me, I was out there I was alone, I wasn't made to feel welcome, I didn't feel welcome I'm trying to tell you in english I didn't feel welcome you did not make me feel welcome nobody at your church made me feel welcome. Who you all going to believe, them or me, I'm the one saying I didn't feel welcome!!!! That's me telling you all. I don't think it's even a matter that people would have to go out of their way to make me feel welcome cause I feel welcome at the mainstream christian church I go to, the eye contact the people there make with me - says ya your worth something - the eye contact the warm smiles they have when greeting me - I know ok I'm welcome here, I'm loved I'm wanted here. I wasn't picking that up at the smith's friends cult. I never felt welcome there!
And I think their doctrine is messed to all hell to, it's a doctrinal issue I have with them nowdays, jesus was god in the flesh the end!!!!!!!!! Ya he had a real flesh but he was god in the flesh. Jesus is lord. Wasn't just a man on this earth. There is a bible verse think in romans says something about jesus being god in the flesh, there really is a bible verse about that don't know where it is though : (
I like that mainstream christian church praise god to, there wasn't any praise songs not in my opinion anyways in the smith's friends songbooks though they pry could pull up 1 or 2 no doubt they would and tell me more how stupid and worthless I am and wrong I am and crazy. Geez I shouldn't of brought up that I have a mental disorder I thought maybe that'd get them treating me nice - wrong. Lot their songs are battle songs and they aren't praiseful - I like praising god/jesus. I like to have a happy song in my heart of praise.
At my church there's a song that says that jesus is much able to save, and I believe that, I believe jesus is able - that he will do amazing things in my life.
I'm hopeful about that!
Dear RssnSpy6,
The disconnect is this. When instances of contrary behavior is brought up, then you say that the doctrine was not handled correctly by its members. This means that the negative behavior of the members should not be a reflection on the doctrine. Would you then attribute the positive behavior of people in SF to the doctrine? Or are you suggesting a discussion about the doctrine in a vacuum without finding out its effect on people's behavior? This is what I meant by saying that you cannot have it both ways. Either you talk about the behavior of the people trying to follow the doctrine in all aspects, or avoid it entirely. You judge mainstream christianity by their actions, how they provide counseling, how they do this and that.
You are right in saying that if one just sits at the back and does not talk to anyone, then its hard to interact and form friendships. But I suspect that that is not the only circumstance in which one finds oneself without friends and I also suspect that you do not know what that feels like. I think it has been mentioned before in this blog by somebody. It is a tragedy that a new comer comes to a church meeting and sits at the back row without being greeted or spoken to by anybody. To put that blame on the new comer is preposterous. You would not understand it, because you have not been in that position and also because you do not wish to. You have shut up all the dissenting voices into boxes of pride, lack of humility etc. To you, everyone who has come into contact with the SF and are not a part of it are either too proud or too selfish. I feel sad that you spout this nonsense. Is this really what Christ revealed to you or are you merely regurgitating what you heard from someone else?
'SF is built on testimonies of the members'. Thats very good and dandy. But again, you are giving me all the elements in someone else's behavior that prevented him/her from having relationships in the SF. If a person is sitting by himself or herself in the last row, go talk to them. If there are new visitors at your church, go say hello, introduce yourself, give them a smile, make them feel welcome. As I said, I have had plenty of experiences with the SF. I have had experiences where I have been to a meeting where the only interactions I have had is what I initiated. When many meetings go by this way, what would you conclude? Perhaps the expectation is that I go up and testify, as you said. But then you must remember that there is an expectation towards that person. Placing testimony as a precondition to get to know a person is laughable, in my opinion. Do you want people to testify just so that the others would talk to them? IMO, testifying is not a means to showing off your spiritual bounty or using it as a means of making friendships or connections within the church. If one goes to the pulpit with that attitude then in my opinion, it is the wrong thing to do. I think you are forgetting the basics of building relationships and jumping ahead. You are trying to teach a starving dying man how to fish, rather than give him a fish. You will pat yourself on the back thinking that you did the right thing, while the guy probably dies on his way to the pond.
I believe with all my heart and soul, that this cult wasn't able to love me how I am, and I wasn't I definately wasn't able to meet their non trendy clothes - THEIR STANDARDS! I am a bellydancing, bracelet wearing, hippy, I like fashion some : ) and I am a diva I'm a flaming gay guy trapped in a girls body of sequined fabulousness. This is me!
And I think I know jesus pretty good, I think jesus would've loved me, I think jesus was about saving like people like me. I think jesus is about love. I think jesus was about reaching out to um loners and rebels and people outcasted in society and loving them. I think jesus loves me as I am. I don't think the smith's friends cult was able to love me as I am. Basically I'm a flaming gay, that happens to be straight, but you know I'm a kathy griffin fan and only reason I didn't go see her this year is cause tickets sold out so fast : ( it was sad : (
I could'nt become the person the smith's friends told me I needed to be to be accepted by them. This is me! Freaking glittery bellydance sequins and all! I told my mainstream christian pastor I'm glitter and sequins, and that's me. I was miserble wearing buns in my hair and no makeup and : p long ugly skirts man I work hard at the gym I want to show my muscled legs off! Not hide them under no potatoe sack saint skirt!
I'm glitter and sequins.
To atanomellon:
Regarding the disconnect--
People are of the flesh. They are sinful and self-seeking by nature. Without Jesus and the gospel they will remain this way. With the gospel they are able to make Christ-like choices in each situation. Without the gospel they 'may' make the right choice (but maybe for the wrong reason) but they are definitely more prone to the wrong choice. So, if each person clings to a WWJD (what would Jesus do) gospel in each situation, then there wouldn't really be these situations. (this is a simplification). But that isn't the case. I can have it both ways because we are talking about the gospel Jesus brought. Either you live according to it and do good or you don't and most likely do bad... This results in the discussion of whether or not SF doctrine is cultic or not. This is on the fly so let me know how you disagree with it...
Regarding the tragedy of the lonely newcomer--
givingittogod was not lonely in the beginning. She has said she emailed a number of SFers and talked with them on the phone. She met people or people met her... The point is that she did make connections. I don't know how they fell apart or why... but I'd guess is that her SF connections found out that she was 'a diva and a flaming gay guy trapped in a girls body of sequined fabulousness...' And weren't really ready for that 'differentness.'
I'll make two more boxes for dissenting voices... Disagreements with doctrine and Disagreements with affiliation with Brunstad. Because I believe that SF preaches the right doctrine, the gospel (and lives it)(not to say that other churches don't), I have to believe that those that meet SF and don't come along have a different calling than I. I do not call them harlots or lost or anything like that. If they are sincere in their faith and don't join SF God must have some other important task for them to carry out.
In your third paragraph you gave a nice list of things to do to a newcomer. These I have done with newcomers in my current and former fellowships. These were done with givingittogod. I cannot say for everyone in SF, only for myself and what givingittogod has shared about her experience.
Testimony is not a precondition for getting to know them. But SF believes in the verse "They were saved by the word of their testimony." It is the wrong thing to do to testify for the wrong reasons.
Do we understand each other better and did I answer your questions/concerns?
atanomellon: you have touched on another typical psychological tactic by cult groups. It goes along with John’s comment on Sept 28 “As a SF leader put it once: An individual can go wrong BUT THE BROTHERHOOD CAN NEVER GO WRONG. “
The logic goes like this; the leadership has an exclusive knowledge of the truth. By definition they have a special calling and can not be wrong, or challenged. Therefore, if an individual, like GivingItToGod, has issues with the group then there must be something wrong with that individual. Most religious groups would frame it as sin. These individuals must have some unrepentant sin in their life otherwise they would conform to the demands of the leadership.
I believe that is why RssnSpy6 has a hard time comprehending the idea that there may be something wrong with the SF teaching. In his mind, if anyone has a bad experience in SF then there must be something wrong with that person. SF by definition can’t be wrong. Typical group think stuff.
In a sense, this ‘group think’ behavior has its benefit. If you give up your free will to the group and let them think for you then some things become much easier. You don’t have to make any important decisions on your own because the group leadership makes those for you. It’s like the guy who had his profile on the Brunstad web site last year (Ref my post Dec 12, 2008). This guy John (a different John) had a desire to be a missionary but Bratlie had other plans for him. He gave up his will to conform to what Bratlie wanted. Groups like this make many of the major decisions for their members, like where they work, where they live, who they marry, how many kids they have, where they spend their money, etc.
I think in some ways it is harder to exercise an independent free will because you have to think for yourself and become responsible for your own decisions, good or bad. That is not always easy. It would be much easier sometimes to let someone else make my decisions.
But God created us in His image and included a free will. We were created as individuals, free to decide for ourselves right from wrong. Groups like this undermine people’s free will and manipulate them in order to fulfill their purpose, and not God’s purpose. It can be very hard to see from the inside and requires you to step back and try to see the big picture. Who are you following? Is it God, or is it other men?
Harold:
You hit the nail right on the head.
SF believes that as a group it is infallible and always right.
Therefore, anyone who does not agree with SF doctrine, or sees its wrong behaviour, is attacked as "sinner" and as "antichrist".
As I said before, anytime the "leaders" imagine or "detect" this kind of attitude, they immediately start a whispering campaign against such a person who then feels increasingly under pressure and is slowly isolated and finally "pushed out".
This process is called "crushing" and while the group does this, they ascribe this to the Saviour Jesus Christ. They are the "executioners" on behalf of Jesus.
They also call this the "treatment" and I will give you the exact quote from SF texts in a day or two (am extremely busy so I need to sift through tonnes of material to find the quotes but it is there).
Through this process they "break the will" of the dissenter or the defector. SF believes in destroying their "enemies" within and without.
Sometimes, the person's will is broken completely and he or she becomes a quietened "broken" SF zombie who lives peacefully inside the group unquestioningly. Such a person becomes a "saint".
Other times, if one knows what is happening, one leaves so that one's mind and will may not be destroyed. But the leaving is hard because it is precisely those you bonded with and loved much over years who turn against you and hate you both individually and as a collective, ostracised as an "evil spirit".
In some cases like GivingittoGod, the inner conflict and silent ostracism leave terrible scars.
RussanSpy believes in this system. Core SF believes in this system and implements it and they are extremely good at it, having had a 100 years of training out of sight of the mainstream churches and the "harlots".
Atonomellon I appreciate your posts.
I want to comment on a point you made about the fruit of the SF doctrine. If we look at all churches (including the SF which I still call a church) with their different interpretations of scripture one finds that there are those who take the scriptures seriously and those that do not. This leads me to think as I have already posted that the correct doctrine is not and end in itself nor something to glory in.
The SF believes it has a good doctrine. They should accept that even if they are right they are still not any better than anyone else as each one is sustained in his walk with God not by human effort but by the mercy of God.
Those who take the SF doctrine and try to walk by it with their human effort end up proud, despising others and like the Pharisees of old. In those who do bear good fruit, the fruit is possible and rather than reflecting the doctrine it possibly reflects humility. They would have possibly borne fruit even without the SF specific doctrines as so many do in other denominations.
Throughout the ages, educated and uneducated, theologians and non theologians have walked with God with different interpretations of scripture. To now claim that a new interpretation of the scriptures is going to get one closer to God is not something I can accept.
Similarly to say that the SF doctrine is fully wrong based on the behavior of some SF is also not quite correct.
God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble. For those in the SF who are proud, God is against them. But if a man is humble he gets grace from God. Can he but bear good fruit?
Atonomellon you make me remember one of Arild Tombre’s messages again regarding working with people … “Teaspoons of advice but buckets of grace/humility”
END
Funnyman: I know what you are trying to say and I am in agreement. I do not have an agenda of discrediting SF doctrine. I am merely speaking out against thought patterns that are self serving and potentially harmful to others and I am interested in finding out how these thought patterns come into existence.
RssnSpy6: The question is this. If I come to your church with a sincere desire to follow Christ and without a pressing desire to sign onto Brunstad Inc, can I expect to find fellowship? Or will I be put into a box of proud or selfish. Do I have to walk and talk like an ardent SFer before I can form any friendships, or can I be myself?
Funnyman:
I question the very basis of your premise - that doctrine does not matter and it is enough that people be good and do good. It sounds a nice utopian idea but what it actually means is that so long as people do good or seemingly good, all is fine with the world.
This is a sort of New Age doctrine which emerged in the 60s and 70s because people had become fed up with organised religions, doctrines, dos and donts, the miserable state of human complexity and problems, etc.
At this point, people began becoming syncretistic and saying that it really does not matter what you believe so long as you can "love one another and be good to each other". This is Funnyman's central doctrine.
It really doesn't matter whether Jesus had deity on earth or not. It really does not matter if one is with SF or not. Everywhere there are good and evil people, whether they know doctrine or not.
By extension, it doesn't matter if Hindus or Buddhists etc understand who Jesus is - it is enough that they do good works. It is not important if unbelievers believe in a peccable (only human and sinful Christ) or impeccable Christ. It is enough is people do good works.
This same doctrine has also been taught within SF when they have been faced with questions about doctrine. The proof texts they use in this context are:
1. Somewhere in Romans it says everyone will be judged by the good they have done and the evil they have done.
2. "It doesnt matter what you say about the Son of Man."
I cant locate the verses just now but I will and post them. Busy very busy.
So Funnyman, this is an old doctrine propounded by those who propagate heresy to escape the charge of not knowing what doctrine is and to be excused of their doctrinal folly.
Be good, do good - that is the road into Heaven, if you believe this doctrine.
For John
The thrust of what I wrote is that doctrine is not an end in itself and that a godly life does not necessarily spring from accuracy in doctrine.
I DID NOT SAY and DO NOT IMPLY the following statements you have made:
“it is enough that people be good and do good”
“so long as people do good or seemingly good, all is fine with the world”
“really does not matter what you believe so long as you can "love one another and be good to each other"
“it doesn't matter if Hindus or Buddhists etc understand who Jesus is - it is enough that they do good works”
“It is not important if unbelievers believe in a peccable (only human and sinful Christ) or impeccable Christ. It is enough is people do good works”
Kindly clarify.
END
Funnyman:
That is exactly what you imply. Because if there is no "true" doctrine, then anyone can believe anything and get to heaven. Either Jesus the Christ is impeccable or he is not - only one of these can be "true". If it does not matter which one he is, then it really does not matter whatever one believes. One can believe in Krishna or Buddha and do good and get to heaven! Check the logic of your thinking - it implies exactly what I wrote!
1. The proof text SF uses to justify their false notion of Jesus being just a man and that whoever does good works will be saved: Romans 2: 6-10
2. The proof text SF uses to justify denying the deity of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ: Luke 12:10
And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.
Atanomellon wrote:
"The question is this. If I come to your church with a sincere desire to follow Christ and without a pressing desire to sign onto Brunstad Inc, can I expect to find fellowship? Or will I be put into a box of proud or selfish. Do I have to walk and talk like an ardent SFer before I can form any friendships, or can I be myself?"
No, my dear Atanomellon, you cannot have fellowship with SF. You might be accorded any of the following values:
1. You are a Hivite, one who seeks to pretend to be humble and tries to survive among the SF "but we will find you out and make you hew wood and carry water". (This is taught in SF oral tradition about people who want to float around in the fellowship.)
2. You are in the "outer court" - not privileged and stuck there like the unconverted children of SF families.
3. You can be a friend of the Bridegroom but not part of the Bride (you're part of the Halleujah multitude but not a disciple)
4. You are a Harlot and "we are going to get you sooner or later and push you out" for "sinners cannot stand in the congregation of the righteous".
5. You can be a "periphery" person (not really important anyways).
In other words, unless you fulfill several spoken and unspoken demands and orders that Brunstad Inc and SF place upon you, and walk and talk like an SF duck and quack the same tones, NO WAY you can have fellowship! This has been tried and tested many times.
You cannot be yourself! You must conform to the living examples of SF "gods", obey the "leaders" in utter submission to be a "good brother" who is loyal more to the "brotherhood" than to Christ!
To atanomellon
"If I come to your church with a sincere desire to follow Christ and without a pressing desire to sign onto Brunstad Inc, can I expect to find fellowship?"--Despite what John says--you would be able to find heart to heart, spirit to spirit, fellowship with SF members. I don't have to donate money to Brunstad if I don't want to, but because I am encouraged and strengthened by the message (the website, the mp3 files, the transmissions)(and I want these services to continue because they edify me) I choose to donate money to both my local SF fellowship and to Brunstad. If you want to make your home in SF then I think you'd have to accept that Brunstad is a major part of SF. I'd guess that there are people in SF that contribute only to their local fellowships.
"Or will I be put into a box of proud or selfish. Do I have to walk and talk like an ardent SFer before I can form any friendships, or can I be myself?"--I made the proud and selfish comments when I was thinking about the people that grew up in SF and decided they didn't want to be along in SF anymore for X reason. The doctrine hadn't changed, just new plans for this and that. I didn't really think about the situation of a new person walking through the doors to their first meeting. If you were new you wouldn't know the difference... It would be as if the local SF fellowship had always been affiliated with Brunstad. It takes a long time, a childhood, to learn to walk and talk like an 'ardent SFer.' You don't have to have the lingo and jargon that is commonly used to form friendships... There are 'new' people in SF that haven't picked up anything in that way and are completely fresh to be around because they haven't grown up in SF. They have a different POView and such.
I'm sharing what I believe is current in SF. If you were around, or remember, 20 or 30 years ago you might have had a different experience. But as Sophie pointed out earlier, people grow up in Christ, SF has also grown up in Christ.
To John
Regarding funnyman's comments... It is quite something that you are able to discern what SFers are thinking and saying without them saying it.
You said, 'only human and sinful Christ' when referring to His peccability. The peccable Christ did not have a body of sins (because He never sinned) but He did have the nature of a man, a human flesh in which dwelt nothing good (i.e. lusts and desires). The difference is monumental.
This my last post for awhile cause I need a break from the smith's friends some them try to beat me into a senseless pulp such is the goal beat down the person that dares to say peep against their church. I am more and more about trying to save this cult, if we try to destroy them like they are trying to destroy me ------ we just as bad as them. I know many of the real body of christ are right now on this site trying to save this cult I appreciate your efforts and I to desire to be on this bandwagon. This cult needs to know jesus is king of kings lord of lords, the alpha and the omega the beginning and the end. I'm heavily in counseling right now with people of my mainstream church..I told them today and this what I believe "We are following jesus his brother's ---------------- he is still king of kings lord of lords the alpha and the omega to jesus be all the honour all the glory all the praise! To jesus!" (like even if the smith's friends were right let's just say they were right and we all become god's following jesus - still I'm nothing, bible says the righteous are scarcely saved - mainstream christianity has it right all the honor all the glory all the praise is jesus christ's the lord!) I'm saved by grace a wretch scarcely saved, saved by the grace of god, I prefer it that way, then I can love jesus even more that he loved me so much to give his life for me.
When I go to my mainstream christian church I aint worshipping just a man that came and opened up some special way for me to become a god. I'm worshipping jesus christ the lord, the king of kings the lord of lords, the lord. my lord. now I'm on a hiatus : )
RssanSpy:
1. So those who were imprisoned in the SF are "proud" because they leave? Have you considered that they leave because they have recognised what is rotten within the system?
2. It seems to me that you neither read the Bible nor the infallible texts of your "gods" like JO Smith and Bratlie.
Both of them unambiguously say that Jesus has a "body of sin" and that he had an "old man".
I will post the exact quotes from their texts soon.
What these infallible "gods of Biblical interpretation" have done is to reverse understanding.
Instead of keeping Christ as the measure and plumbline, they look to texts from Paul and James and Hebrews OUT OF CONTEXT and use them improperly to create their twisted doctrine.
So, Christ has been now "created in the image of men" instead of the "exact representation of God" as Sophie mentioned earlier.
If men have a "sinful flesh", the logic is that "brother" Christ also had a sinful flesh. If men had to be liberated from sin, then "brother" Christ also had to be liberated from sin.
The central argument is: "Jesus Christ is the first man on earth to have been liberated from the sin inside himself".
This is contrary to my silly and foolish understanding that Jesus Christ is the Lord from Heaven ("I am from above - you are from beneath")who comes to rescue me from the mire of my sin.
SF has this strange notion that THE DOCTOR MUST FIRST SUFFER THE DISEASE TO CURE THE PATIENTS WHO COME TO HIM.
SF interpreters cannot understand that the Great Physician did not need to have diseases in order to understand what diseases are in order to find a cure for them and then to apply the cure first to himself before He could apply it to others.
Pharisees, "You will surely say to me "Physician heal thyself". This is what SF tells Jesus. Then they assume that He healed himself and therefore now it is worthy to follow Him.
What a pathethic doctrine! And what a spell it casts over the blindly believing! Evil spirits know well enough how to keep their prisoners happy and content.
But being happy and content is no sign that these prisoners really know Jesus Christ - He was Lord and God before He descended to earth, He was both Lord and God every second he was on earth and He will return as Lord and God!
John : you have used "logic" to claim I imply things that I certainly do not. However I have some questions for you that I would like you to answer.
My questions to you :
1. Is belief/understanding of Christ’s impeccability a requirement for salvation? (Rom10:9)
2. If not why classify those who believe in a peccable Jesus (who overcame all sin) along with Hindus and Buddhists as you have done?
3.If they are saved are they not a part of the body of Christ which is the Church? (Col 1:18)
4. If they are a part of the body can there be fellowship between those who believe in a peccable Jesus (who overcame all sin) and those who do believe in an impeccable Jesus on earth. (1Jn 1:7)
If you do not want to answer it it is fine. Just say so and we can move on. But kindly do not use phrases like “typical SF tactic to divert attention…” or “ as a brainwashed SF you will never understand…” as you have done in the past to avoid answering questions.
You have still not answered Russian’s question too regarding the harlot.
Your answers would be welcome.
END
Funnyman:
SF followers avoid theological discussion and hide behind the veil of "ignorance" to justify twisted doctrine, not to mention twisted behaviour.
If the fundamentals or majors are wrong and twisted, there is no point in arguing about the minors. Sigurd Bratlie's interpretation of the "harlot" is a minor issue, equivalent to asking whether or not there are streets paved with gold in heaven.
Impeccability of Jesus Christ is not a minor issue, it is a funda-mental issue.
It is not possible for those who believe in a "peccable" Christ to have fellowship with those who believe in an "impeccable" Christ.
This is clearly and unambiguously stated in the texts of all the infallible "fathers" of the SF cult.
This is also the reason why the girl in Owasso cannot have fellowship with her parents who are believers in Christ Jesus and subscribe to your prooftext. Why is she hiding from them? Why can she not go any longer to their church?
Because she has been taught that:
1. Her parents are "harlots" and "outsiders" and "enemies"
2. She "must come out from among them and be separate to be called a daughter of God"
3. The church her parents go to is a "harlot" church.
Why is it that SF (you are only a peripheral SF member with your confused views which most sober and dedicated SF members do not have!) cannot have "fellowship" with those who believe in the Impeccability of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ?
Because your own cult leaders do teach you that SF members must "try the spirits".
"If a spirit cannot confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh - meaning, from the SF point of view that Jesus has sinful flesh and is only a man who became God - that person is anti-christ.
SF texts clearly teach this, SF core leaders clearly teach this, we have videos and tapes of this teaching, the Pope Kare Smith and his cardinals teach this, core SF members believe this and practice this.
True SF members are able to sniff out declare other Christians to be "anti-christs" and "harlots". Of course, SF has learnt to do this subtly and in hiding and in exclusivity. But it is the core of SF teaching.
One who understands Jesus as Lord and God while on earth cannot have "fellowship" with one who has chosen to be in deliberate error about impeccability. One can be "friends" with such a person just as one can be friends with anyone on earth, but the two positions are fundamentally poles apart.
If one can have "fellowship" with those who believe in a "peccable" Christ and who believe that Jesus has sinful flesh and was a man who became God on earth, then one can as well have "fellowship" with the Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, New Agers, people who are in touch with Christ Consciousness like Transcendental Meditationists and all such people.
There is no problem with your cool "liberal" attitude. But please do not try to sell me those SF wares in that guise and by mixing up categories!
John
You have once again resorted to accusing the SF to dodge a direct answer to the questions I posed. If you do not want to answer them just say so as I mentioned before and I will move on.
1. Is belief/understanding of Christ’s impeccability a requirement for salvation? You seem to think it is a fundamental issue. Fundamental…for what?
2. If not why classify those who believe in a peccable Jesus (who overcame all sin) along with Hindus and Buddhists as you have done?
3.If they are saved are they not a part of the body of Christ which is the Church?
4. If they are a part of the body can there be fellowship between those who believe in a peccable Jesus (who overcame all sin) and those who do believe in an impeccable Jesus on earth?
Regarding question 4 you have made it clear that YOU cannot have fellowhip with those who choose to be in “deliberate error” about the peccability issue. I for one enjoy fellowship with Brethren, etc even though do not belong to those churches and differ on doctrinal matters. We have so much else in common. You would however dismiss this as “liberal”, “confused”. Is it “confused” to be open to fellowhip? Aren’t you the one who is drawing up conditions for fellowhip?
Are your statements a reflection of the Brethren viewpoint ( I think you mentioned you were Brethren somewhere, correct me if wrong) or are you just speaking for yourself when you say that “One who understands Jesus as Lord and God while on earth cannot have "fellowship" with one who has chosen to be in deliberate error about impeccability”?. I enjoy fellowhship with those from the Brethren who know EXACTLY what I believe. So who are you speaking for when you claim that “One who understands Jesus as God….”?
If Bratlie’s interpretation of the “harlot” is a minor issue …. you have posted so much about that “minor” issue….!
And as I said before do not resort to accusing the SF and personal comments directed at those who question you to avoid answering.
I would welcome the views of anyone else on this matter too.
END
Funnyman
John did answer your question. He
is correct, the reason he puts you
in the same bucket with Hindus is
because of your belief in a peccable Jesus. Acc to these pagan
traditions we are able to overcome
our sinful ways and tap into our
christlikeness that exsists in all
of us, thus attaining godness or
accended master or whatever you
want to call it. Like solomon said
there is nothing new. Even heresey
gets recycled. Peccable Christ-
ology is no different.
GivingittoGod
Hey girl way to go. Dont give up
I am very proud of you. ps I dont
think you need a cult exit counsler
You are doing great and it sounds
like your church is helping you.
Who else whould like to offer snaps
to GITG???
For Jarsmom
Thanks for your comment on what I wrote. However I would disagree with what you said for I feel that though John has aired his views on why he puts me/SF with Hindus and Buddhists he has not addressed the questions I put up directly.
Secondly I can say for myself that I believe that God sent His Son, to die for me on the cross. Because of His death I have the forgiveness of sins and I am reconciled with Him. So I believe I am saved by the finished work on the cross. This is what causes me to be a part of the body of Christ. This is why I am saved and this is not what Hindus and Buddhists believe. So though classifying a person like me into that bucket may be convenient it is inaccurate.
I do not advocate salvation by works, or delving into the good in people etc.
For all
I am not asking the members on the blog to reconcile with the SF. If members on this blog feel that they cannot have fellowship with the SF that is another matter. There is so much more to reconcile with in the SF than just the peccability issue. I grant that.
But the point I am aiming at in raising these questions to John and others on the blog is that the belief in Christ’s peccabilty is not the central issue when it pertains to SF behavior, however wrong the belief sounds. I say this also because I have seen so many other Non SF Christians who believe in Christ’s peccability and so many non SF Christians who are blissfully ignorant of the issue (and will probably remain so their whole lives ) who are fantastic Christian believers. I cannot but disagree when a sweeping statement is made that if one does not believe in an impeccable Christ one is in the same bucket as Muslims and Hindus.
How can one reduce the difference between a Christian and a Buddhist/ Muslim etc to the belief in an impeccable Christ. vs the Belief in a peccable Christ?
I do not post these questions to take away the seriousness of the defects in the SF. I post these questions to put the peccability issue in perspective.
END
Funnyman:
Even if you don't get my point in your desperate defence of the heresy that SF practices at the theological level which inevitably affects the lives and behaviour of its members, someone with simplicity like Jarsmom has seen it.
Funnyman wrote: "I have seen so many other Non SF Christians who believe in Christ’s peccability."
They are not 'christians' - every Christian who is saved knows intuitively and instinctively that Jesus Christ is Lord and God and was God on earth until or unless an SF cultist, or a Jehovah's Witness, or a Mormon, or a Moonie, or a Christadelphian comes by and seduces him/her to mess up his/her mind and makes him/her drink of a certain "spirit"!
If you claim to have "fellowship" with these Brethren who love you (who knows, they might just be tolerating you and praying for you to be saved), I can only say that these Brethren have not smelt out the "error" in you - or if they have they might just be nice people who do not want to break a friendship!
Ignorance is alright but people who choose "deliberate error" and lead people into that error have a reckoning with God concerning His Only Begotten Son one day.
Again, since you believe in that peccability like the other cults mentioned (being a nice guy and liberal, etc), in no way are you different from Buddhists, Hindus, etc.
One can be your "friend", but no "fellowship". You are confusing yourself between friendship and fellowship.
The "Spirit" that can confess the deity of Jesus while on earth is different from the "spirit" that confesses that he was just another sinful man who became God.
It is a "spirit" that controls SF which claims to be "of Christ". But it is a "brother" of "spirits" like the one that inhabits Maharishi Mahesh Yogi of TM and others who do not mind mentioning and honoring Christ in some way (Christ-consciousness, Christ-spirit, etc) but cannot confess Him as Lord and God on earth. In this sense, you are no better than a Muslim - for Islam does respect the "man" Jesus but specifically rejects His deity. The Jews also rejected the "deity" of Christ while he was on earth. The SF does the same! So do Jehovah's Witness.
So my friend, along with your good "brothers" in SF and going with yours and SF logic of peccability, you are indeed no better than the Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, strange eastern cults like TM, New Agers, Jehovahs Witness, Mormons, Christadelphians, Moonies, Branch Davidians and all such sundry "heretics".
Do not fool yourself even if you are able to fool many others!
For John
Thank you for your post in response to what I wrote.
You state : “every Christian who is saved knows intuitively and instinctively that Jesus Christ is Lord and God and was God on earth until or unless an SF cultist….”- Is this your assumption about the belief of non SF Christians or is this your experience? It would be interesting if this is true, but my experience with non SF Christians shows otherwise. And these are those who have no contact whatsoever with SF. They are not ignorant tribals as you once alluded to, but are highly educated and even involved in bringing people to the Lord. Perhaps your experience has been different. Christians may intuitively know that Jesus is God. Granted. But I do not think they necessarily intuitively believe that he was impeccable on Earth.
If I understand your post I have to conclude that you feel that even if one believes that Jesus is Lord, and believes he died for their sins , this is not enough but the belief that he was impeccable on Earth or the ignorance thereof is also necessary for salvation. You would also feel that claiming He was peccable rather than being a different interpretation of scripture is a heresy. Correct me if I am wrong. If I am right and that is what you meant I will move on as I said before although I disagree with you on this matter.
You equate rejecting Jesus’ diety now with rejecting his impeccability on Earth. You say that Muslims reject Chrit’s diety now so if one does not believe He was impeccable when on Earth he is in the same category. IF this is your opinion and you stand by it that is fine. I will move on though I disagree.
You have to accept the reality that many Christians do believe that Christ could have sinned but did not. If you consistently deny this fact I am at a loss as to what to say because then you are denying a reality, a reality that has absolutely no relation to the SF.
To say the SF is a cult is one thing. That is a subjective statement and is your opinion and you may have your reasons for saying so. But I think that when one says that the non belief in Christ’s impeccability makes one non Christian, it is an objective statement, has a far greater reach than just the SF and is doctrinally indefensible.
END
Funnyman:
You are in denial. Your arguments only prove that a cultist will always believe what the cult teaches.
Let me say it once and for all:
The teaching of a peccable Jesus who had sinful flesh and was a man who became God on earth IS HERESY.
It is an ancient heresy which has often reared its head which has been crushed again and again so that such seducing spirits do not steal the sheep of Jesus Christ.
It will not be long before this heresy is crushed in SF too - that is, SF will not be able to parade itself as "christian" but will be openly clubbed with the heretic groups like Jehovahs Witness, Muslims, Mormons, etc. That is sufficient.
The SF has hidden its heresy for over 100 years and avoided scrutiny by Christians. But the time is coming and already is when this ancient serpent heresy which has acquired a new guise will be exposed and laid aside as it has happened many times in the past in the history of true Christianity.
So, move on instead of trying to argue for "error".
You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time (SF cultists), but you cannot fool all of the people all the time on the matter of the deity of Christ while He walked the earth.
Funnyman:
"To say the SF is a cult is one thing. That is a subjective statement and is your opinion and you may have your reasons for saying so. But I think that when one says that the non belief in Christ’s impeccability makes one non Christian,"
This is my final post directed at you.
The point is not to say that this is "one thing", that is "another thing".
The entire discourse on this blog is to expose the "web of deceit" that the SF is involved in from the theological level to behavioural to organisational to money-collecting to ostracising, etc, etc.
Those who can see this "web of deceit" will be safe from the SF.
May I move on from you with a verse that I read as I was pondering the discussions with you:
Proverbs 26:4
Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will be like him yourself.
You are free to apply this verse to me!
Thank you John for your response to my questions.
1Cor 1:27
You are free to apply this verse to me. :-)
Funnyman
I am glad to hear what you said that the cross is a finished work.
Most SFers will say this is not a
true statement. I think much of
the problem here ( not all lest the
villiagers take up pitchforks and
torchs) Is vanacular. It dosent
however resolve the peccability/
impecc. issue.
I am wonder for the purpose of
discussion on this blog if we get
on the same page with our termon-
ologies. For instance, instead of
salvation use Atonement(redemmption
or sanctification. I think this
will go a long way in making clear
er what each of us means.
So, that being said my understand
ing of SF is this. They do believe
in the attonement through Jesus.
Which is of course a finished work.
The voyage through the flesh is a
finished work, believers need to
appropriate this on a daily basis.
When you say salvaation to a main-
streamer, they usually equaate this
with the atonement. Not all, how
ever, they believe the atonement is
a finished work and that sanctifi
cation ( salvation to you) is the
process. mainstreamers believe that
we can live victioursly because
of the power of the spirit, not
because Jesus was peccable. Am
I making sense.
@Russian
"you would be able to find heart to heart, spirit to spirit, fellowship with SF members."
If only B.C.C.(SF) were as ideal as you present it. In reality, sadly, there is a lot of narrow-mindedness which exists in the group. This narrow-mindedness is not just exclusive to the older generation within the church - rather it has been passed on to the younger generation as well. Again bear in mind that I am not trying to attack Brunstad Christian Church (SF) nor to sway your way of thinking. It does not work like that.
Also think about how your perceptions of a young person who leaves the SF church is as opposed to a young person who comes to SF after cutting all ties with his/her family/social circle. Is there a difference in the way you view the two types of individual?
You and I are not far from each in terms of age. We are of the same generation (basing this on what you have mentioned in your previous posts). Hopefully,some type of conscience-raising (in both you and me) has been accomplished through our exchanges.
For Jarsmom :
Thank you for your posts and yes you are making sense.
I used the term “finished work”. This is not a term that the SF uses.
For all :
I think there is a difference between what a group “believes” and what a group emphasizes or actively preaches. Let me illustrate this in my post.
The peccability issue. I have discussed this before so I will not go into it again. But I will use this as an example of something that the SF believes in and emphasizes (mostly indirectly). For this reason it is not surprising to hear a lot of young people come up and say things like “I have faith that I can overcome just as Jesus overcame.” The peccabilty issue is thus emphasized continuously in meetings, not with words like “Christology” and “peccability” but indirectly in statements like the above. The peccability issue is also emphasized in literature, indirectly and even directly. John has brought up references in this regard.
When it comes to Jesus’ death on the cross, the love of God, worshiping God and other topics like the forgiveness of sins, it is not that the SF do not believe in them. If pointedly questioned, an SFer will accept that none of his works will get him to heaven, will accept that Jesus died for his sins and that is how he has access to the Father, will accept that one needs to worship God, and will accept that we need the forgiveness of sins on a daily basis. However this may not be what he thinks about usaully and such beliefs which would be automatic and familiar to a mainstream Christian youth may require a little logical thinking and Bible searching on the part of the SF youth. The SF does not emphasize this in their literature and in their meetings. I think there will be very little SF literature on the forgiveness of sins, God’s love, worship etc. My point is what use is a belief if it is not actively taught to the children and youth and to everyone for that matter? What use is a belief if it is not emphasized? One needs to be constantly reminded of these things.
This causes a young SFer to be very strong in topics like victory, overcoming, being a warrior for the Lord etc. None of these are wrong in isolation. However he may be woefully unequipped and very shaky on the aspects of love, kindness, forgiveness, and the blood of Jesus.
This leads him to be a fiery person able to swing the sword and say hard things and take hard blows but often unable to relate with gentleness and forgiveness because he has no experience and above all no teaching on this matter save what he has learnt for himself. It can cause him to develop “the SF system of hard knocks” a phrase of atonomellon’s that I think is very apt. People may be told to judge themselves. For example an SFer may be tempted to believe that judging oneself is the answer for all life’s problems and this will reflect in advice he gives to many people.
I think that the SF behavior is because of a systematic lack of the emphasis of so many things in the Bible that are required to make one a wholesome Christian. While aspects of victory and going through the flesh may be comparable to a high energy drink, they are no substitutes for wholesome meals.
So while many in this blog have commented on the defects and errors in what the SF does teach, the aspects of Christianity that they do not actively teach may be just as equally responsible for what you have seen or experienced. A mere belief of what is right is not sufficient. It has to be actively taught and passed down to the children. It will then change behavior.
I will be busy for the next few days and may not post. However would welcome comments on what I have posted and will reply later.
END
To John
"1. So those who were imprisoned in the SF are "proud" because they leave? Have you considered that they leave because they have recognised what is rotten within the system?"-- I will retract what I said regarding 'everyone who leaves SF is proud.' That statement is a blanket statement that I have no way of proving or demonstrating and implies that I can discern their mind's and heart's. I can't do that. There are a myriad of reasons a person would choose to leave SF.
What I would like to discuss is your statement about 'recognizing what is rotten about about SF.' Some may find this statement true, and thus leave... But someone leaving because they believe SF is rotten does not make SF rotten. If everyone that left SF left because the system was 'rotten' then there would be an argument for that. But some leave because they want to pursue X, or believe Y, or don't agree with W, etc. This logic seems strong to me.
"2. It seems to me that you neither read the Bible nor the infallible texts of your "gods" like JO Smith and Bratlie.
Both of them unambiguously say that Jesus has a "body of sin" and that he had an "old man"."-- Since you are busy I took the liberty of looking up "body of sin" in the Bible. In NKJv there is one reference in Romans 6 to the body of sin, but it doesn't refer to Jesus. Neither does the Amplified, American Standard, nor New International. I can't check all of them, nor can I check all of the contexts, so I'm looking forward to those 'exact quotes' soon.
I am also looking forward to the texts in which JO Smith and Bratlie say that Jesus had a body of sin.
"So, Christ has been now "created in the image of men" instead of the "exact representation of God" as Sophie mentioned earlier."-- This has been debated on this blog in abundance. Just to state the SF position in clarification, Jesus was with God, like God, etc since the beginning. Around 0 AD Jesus put off His godliness and was sent to earth to condemn sin, make a way for salvation, etc. He died on the cross of Cross of Calvary as a perfect sacrifice, undefiled by sin, and was resurrected by God and restored to an exalted place by God... Where He lives now to make intercession for us (Heb. 7:25).
There exist notable people in history that believe in Christ's peccability... Two such ones that I could unearth were E.F. Harrison and Charles Hodge. This belief of Christ is not limited to heretics and cult groups. The majority in this day and age believe that Christ was impeccable. This doesn't make them right, it just makes them the majority, thus the 'mainstream' title is applied. As has been the said before, the important thing is that we all see Christ as an example that we are to follow (1 Pet 2:21).
Using your analogy of the doctor... SF believes that the doctor has to at least know what the symptons/warning signs of the disease are (lusts and desires of the flesh) for Him to be able to cure them. The 'symptoms,' if not treated properly, cause sickness/sin. How else would He know what to prescribe if He didn't know the warning signs?
The language you used doesn't clarify what you mean very well. When you say 'sinful flesh' does that mean that flesh is sinful or that one has sinned causing sin to come into the flesh. Because each person hears different preachers and teachers and reads different Bible translations we really should clarify the terms we use. I believe that this practice would clear up some things.
"But being happy and content is no sign that these prisoners really know Jesus Christ "--Wasn't it you that brought out the verse that 'you shall know them by their fruits'? Aren't (true) happiness and contentment fruits?
Did you just say that jarsmom was 'simple?' Oi.
To John (Continued)
"The entire discourse on this blog is to expose the "web of deceit" that the SF is involved in from the theological level to behavioural to organisational to money-collecting to ostracising, etc, etc."--I believe this blog was meant as a Discussion to explore the possibility of SF as a cult. There has been some discussion and some exposure but too much of it has been (in my opinion) unconstructive/petty bashing, of which I may have been a partaker. I'm learning how to discuss better.
To atanomellon
You said it is sad that there is such 'narrow-mindedness' in SF. At the same time you haven't, or I don't recall, said exactly where you stand. You've been to meetings... are you in SF now? If not, when did you leave? How do you know such narrow-mindedness exists? Is it restricted to what you've experienced on this blog?
I am not sure what you mean regarding your question of the youths leaving their respective fellowships. Could you elaborate?
I believe that I've had my conscience raised, thanks to you and funnyman (there may be others). But I've also had my horizon dimmed when I see what others do/say in the face of something with which they disagree. Two natural responses to criticism are to retract into a shell or lash out in anger. I don't want to do either.
To funnyman
Your paragraph on an SF youth's strong topics vs. their weak topics was quite good. As a further to that paragraph I'd like to share that the root of the problem is sin... Can we agree on that? The emphasized part of the doctrine SF holds seems to focus on this problem. In my personal experience other churches focus on the fruits of the spirit (love, gentleness, self-control, etc) that are the result of a life of victory over that sin--without really showing the way to get those virtues. I agree that a broader emphasis on what should follow a life of victory over sin is needed in SF without taking any emphasis off dealing with the problem.
As Sophie wrote earlier, and I am so fond of quoting,... Christians are in a development. The beginning of the development is to get at the root of the problem. The development is to show forth the virtues of Christ in each situation. Without getting at the root of the problem there is no way to layer on enough love and gentleness to cover sin because it will always show through.
RssanSpy: It is commendable that your conscience is now raised so you do not believe anymore that all who leave SF are proud. But in a sense you just grown up because what SF teaches its members is that anyone who leaves is "anti-christ" and has lost either "salvation" or the grand opportunity of being in the "Bride" as compared to the lowly "church" or "wedding guests" at Jesus wedding. So if you can see it that people are free to walk out of the SF when they find that 2+2 is not 4, it's good.
2. Am sure you got the names of those two "honorable" men from this site:
http://eternalperspectives.com/2006/01/23/jesus-peccable-or-impeccable/
Of course, there have been many "eminent" and "honorable" men who have believed in and propagated the notion of peccability. It began a long time ago with a man called Arius. And then many others have come in that Arian form who are unable to understand the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ while on earth. That is a mystery hidden from them and so they would never be able like Peter to confess "You are the Son of God" if they met Jesus on earth. If they had been in heaven before the Lamb slain from the foundation came down, they might have confessed "You are God" (I wonder!!) and if they are in heaven after they have done all their "works" on earth, they might be able to confess "You are God".
However, Peter could confess when Jesus was in the flesh - "You are the Son of God". In other words, he saw the deity of Jesus on earth and that was "revealed to him not by flesh and blood but by the Father".
I pray that the Father might give you this revelation one day and SF strives hard to deny their members this revelation simply because its leaders also do not have it. As their leaders, so their disciples!
In any case, I believe RssanSpy, that you are slowly learning to understand what theology is and to learn something about it. It is wonderful to see you look up the names of Hodge etc to try to find a defence for Smith and Bratlie, etc. I thought these SF "fathers" we self-sufficient and did not need any back-up!!
Going further, the theological ramifications of saying that Jesus was peccable are acknowledged on the very page you probably looked up in defence of SF peccability.
"Peccability solves the problem of validating temptation but raises other issues even more troubling."
If you ask God for wisdom, you will slowly come to understand that these other troubling issues slowly depart only when you move from the peccable Jesus to the impeccable Jesus but that of course depends on God and not man's intervention.
So may God the Father give you revelation of the Son of God, Jesus Christ.
Think on this: The Lamb was slain from before the very foundation of the world.
SF tries to make him slay himself every moment of his life. So Jesus had to kill himself, deny himself, crucify himself, over and over while he lived on earth in the days of his flesh?
RssanSpy:
You are right. Nowhere in the Bible (NT) is a body of sin ascribed to Jesus. But the SF 'gods" ascribe the same to Jesus. This is the twisting of the Scriptures.
I will post the exact texts from the cult writings soon - there are many of them.
I would suggest that you acquire an Interlinear NT or Study Bible and then you can slowly begin to understand the nuances of Scripture and be delivered from false interpretation. It's a good place to begin.
You wrote:
"The 'symptoms,' if not treated properly, cause sickness/sin."
The symptoms arise because of the sickness. Not the other way around as you put it. Jesus had no such symptoms as we had, or did he? Are you returning to the SF idea that Jesus sinned unconsciously? But Jesus could see the symptoms in humans and help the sickness in men without having the sickness himself.
The Bible says that you and I have this sickness from head to toe. The Bible says all our righteousness is as rags.
Did Jesus also have this sickness from head to toe?
Is all the Lord's righteousness as rags in the sight of the Father like ours?
Was Jesus exactly like the 10 lepers he met and healed?
Funnyman: I understand your point about the fact that there are good people who exhibit Godly behavior in many different denominations and religions. They may have wrong theology but their behavior is faultless. However, according to the Bible, that doesn’t get them into Heaven. But so what? What does that have to do with the situation here in Owasso?
Here we have a school teacher who presents himself as a Godly Christian man who proselytizes in a public school classroom and uses his influence and lies to intentionally deceive and damage other families in this community in the name of Smith’s Friends.
Is this what you consider to be honorable to God?
You can sugar coat the Smith’s Friends theology all you want but from our vantage point SF still produces bad fruit. All the sugar in the world won’t change what the eye witnesses here have experienced for themselves. The fruit is still rotten. Lies, deceptions, threats; it’s all here.
We could talk endlessly about the peccability or impeccability of Jesus and whether or not either view is sufficient for salvation, but in the end it is God who judges, not men. And nothing will stop the hour of God’s judgment for this SF leader, or all of us.
If SF members want to look the other way and associate themselves with this kind of evil then, in my book, they are a willing accomplice and just as evil as he is.
RssnSpy, you want to know about the harlot in the book of Revelation? There is so much imagery in this book that has been debated for two thousand years that it leads me to say that anyone who claims that they know, for certain, what it all means is a liar. Only God knows for certain.
But I do know this much for sure, Jesus is coming back. And when He does there is a great battle between Jesus, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, and satan. And Jesus wins.
So tell me again…why did this girl move into this man’s home and suddenly become afraid of being harmed by her Christian family? Where is this kind of teaching supported by God’s word? And Luke 14:26 doesn’t count, we have already covered how this has been taken out of context and twisted.
Funnyman and John have talked a lot about fellowshipping with other faiths. And RssnSpy has made the claim (ref Sept 2) that the relationship between this girl and her family has “moved forward” and “There is peace and civility between them now.” I want to address these statements.
First of all RssnSpy has tried to plant the idea that there is “peace and civility” now. This implies that there wasn’t peace and civility to begin with. This family has always been peaceful and civil in trying to maintain a relationship with their daughter. It was the sons of this SF leader that assaulted the girl’s family at the wedding while the other SF members and family members watched. It was this SF leader who threatened this girl’s parents with legal action. He threatened Keith as well.
The only thing this girl’s family is guilty of is trying to “fellowship” with their daughter. This includes her brothers, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins. For this they have all been subjected to the very treatment as described by John for outsiders.
So Funnyman, while you may be able to “fellowship” with others outside SF, the behavior of this SF group is quite the opposite. The argument will be made, and has been, that she just doesn’t WANT to have a relationship with her family. It is evident from what RssnSpy said (Aug 15) that she believes her family is harassing her. I wouldn’t blame her for not wanting to have anything to do with her family under those circumstances. The only problem is that those are lies. So the question is what is the source of those lies? Since she won’t have anything to do with any of her own relatives, or her best friends she had in high school or anyone else outside the group there is only one source that makes sense.
I believe the real reason she can’t “fellowship” with anyone outside the group has nothing to do with religion, peccability, or any other theological issue. It is a simple scam to hide the truth from, and control her. All the family wants is a chance to defend themselves against the lies that she believes. Only then can a real relationship “move forward”.
I have recently been told a relevant story that illustrates and validates the true beliefs of this local SF group. It seems that his daughter who just graduated from high school last year developed an interest in some boy (an outsider) and wanted to “hang out” with him. This upset this SF leader so much that he went to this boy’s home and told him and his parents to stay away from his daughter.
So why is it OK for this SF leader to move young people into his home knowing that their Christian parents disapprove (and I don’t care what age they are) and teach them to fear everyone outside the group, but he can’t tolerate it at all when his own daughter develops a friendship with a young man from outside SF?
I think the answer is obvious. If you believe that your salvation is dependant on being immersed, wholly and completely, in the SF church then you would do anything you could to “protect” your children from becoming influenced with all those demons on the outside. Especially ones that go to a “harlot” church.
So here again, you can sugar coat the SF theology all you want but the resultant behavior validates what John has to say.
Harold:
The truth perhaps is that the SF leadership is using Funnyman and RssanSpy to test how they can influence or change the direction of this blog as it is the only place where the misdeeds of SF are highlighted and articulated in a free and multi-dimensional manner.
The SF believes in undermining its enemies, destroying its enemies if possible, protecting its "own" using fear and threats and social techniques of isolation/ostracism, imbuing people with unreasonable fear of a good and loving God and many other such tactics. They use rumors, slander, legal threats, even physical violence if needed to get their ends as Owasso proves.
One of the "urban legends" of SF is how an SF meeting was once disturbed and how Kare Smith led the SF members in physically beating up the disturbers. There is the other story of how Kare Smith once took on a biker gang disturbing his neighbourhood and threatened them physically. These are held up as "good examples" in SF. Most of the Norwegian youth have had military training so they can be easily called upon to such actions too by the leadership when needed.
I don't know how the situation is in Owasso is exactly. But this story about the SF leader's daughter is interesting.
In SF the core leaders and members will never ever allow children to have anything to do with the outsiders. All key marriages are inside the cult. Perhaps someone like Funnyman might be "allowed" to marry outside SF but he would be looked down upon and his wife. More so if his wife does not care about SF being the ONLY CHURCH.
DID JESUS SIN UNCONSCIOUSLY/UNKNOWINGLY?
The unity of JO Smith, Aslaksen and Sigurd Bratlie in "spirit" lies in an error which they all teach, that Jesus, before a certain age (which these geniuses can specify other than speculate using proof-texts which are their "private interpretation"), could have sinned unconsciously like other children do.
In other words, Jesus could have "stolen" cookies he had been asked not to eat from the jar and then "lied" to mommy saying "I did not steal" just like other children.
Here is how Bratlie explains it:
"The resurrection proved that Jesus had not sinned, despite the act that he had this flesh in which we know dwells no good thing. He returned to the Father undefiled by the flesh of David (See Rom 7:18). The significance for us is that we can through the gospel attain to victory over sin and to the same life that He lived. It is written about Jesus: "Curds and honey He shall eat, when He knows to efuse the evil and choose the good" (RSV). There was a time for Jesus, just like with other children, when He did not understand how to choose. However, when the time came that He was able to choose, His trials and temptations resulted in victory which was curds and hone for him (See Isaiah 7:15-16)."
This implies that while Jesus did not have "sins of commission", there might have been "sins of omission". It implies that while Jesus was brilliant at having "conscious" victory over sin, there were moments when unconscious sin were allowed for him and He was not considered guilty for the same by God.
Again, Bratlie writes:
"There are many concocted religious expressions that are not found in the Bible. One of them goes like this: "He is true God and true man". That of course is not possible since he would not have needed then to walk by faith but He is "the author and finisher of our faith". Yet, in another sense, is is true, because God sent His Son. When the Son was sent, it was His (the Son's) Spirit that was sent and He (the Son) did not have the whole fullness of God that He had when He was with the Father. No, He relinquished his God-likeness, or as it says in some translations "He emptied Himself". When His Spirit was born in a human body, it had been "emptied" as it were.
These texts are from Bratlie's book SO GREAT A SALVATION.
One can see the utter confusion that exists in the mind of this man as he tries to analyze and explain with a hard finality and certainty the mystery of Trinity and the Deity of Jesus Christ.
SF members are taught to repeat this stuff like parrots and believe that Smith, Bratlie Aslaksen and some of their other leaders writings (now includes Kare Smith) can never be in error.
Their infallibility as prophets, gurus and god-men of the SF is established by blind faith in their "revelation" which has been set out in the above words.
SF brainwashes its members to not look deeper into the Scriptures because they know that anyone who studies the Word of God using the tools of language, history, culture, context, hermeneutics, etc will be able to see through the cult's false teaching.
Correction in previous post:
It should read: which these geniuses CANNOT specify ...
Harold:
By the way, this John whom you mentioned as cited as a shining example for others on the website www.brunstad.org is the very same person who preached in India that "If you do not give your money to Brunstad, you will not be in the rapture". That is a true story.
This John was directly involved with extremely high motivation along with two of his flesh and blood brothers in India in pushing the legal case against Zac Poonen (their brother-in-law) with the intention of putting him in jail and this move had the full backing of Kare Smith and other leaders of the SF in Brunstad. This is the single most powerful example of how ruthless SF can be in terms of dividing and seeking to destroy family ties and people who "oppose" the SF.
The other interesting thing about www.brunstad.org is the manner in which it is constructed. It uses a media interface that is nothing other than high-end 21st century advertising. One can never know who the leaders of different SF fellowships are, the pictures are always of "smiling, happy" people, there is a forced uniformity of thought and testimony, the whole idea is of presenting a certain IMAGE to the world that can get people to buy into the cult.
More recently SF members have been promised both praise and rewards if they keep advertising this site on the social networks like Twitter, Facebook, in their IMs, etc so that people can be pointed in the direction of the New Jerusalem - Brunstad.
The new leaders at Brunstad are media savvy and looking hard for recruits since making babies by the dozen is not sufficient to sustain the movement. A leader from Germany is understood to have said recently: "The outer court in the church is growing too big" - that is young people from SF families are beginning to question what goes on within. The SF tries to address this problem by trying to create "in-house entertainment" and "work projects" that can keep these youth from fleeing to the "world". As Kare Smith once put it: If we can keep them working hard for us, then they will not be able to go into the world as they will have no time to think of it.
The places where SF is trying to make inroads especially are in Africa, Latin America and India as they find very few recruits in Europe and America and Australia.
Details of the SF vs Zac Poonen case which shows how the SF argues its exclusivity:
http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/818997/
Funnyman: “I am not asking the members on the blog to reconcile with the SF. If members on this blog feel that they cannot have fellowship with the SF that is another matter.”
“Are your statements a reflection of the Brethren viewpoint ( I think you mentioned you were Brethren somewhere, correct me if wrong) or are you just speaking for yourself when you say that “One who understands Jesus as Lord and God while on earth cannot have "fellowship" with one who has chosen to be in deliberate error about impeccability”?. I enjoy fellowhship with those from the Brethren who know EXACTLY what I believe. So who are you speaking for when you claim that “One who understands Jesus as God….”?”
“Regarding question 4 you have made it clear that YOU cannot have fellowhip with those who choose to be in “deliberate error” about the peccability issue. I for one enjoy fellowship with Brethren, etc even though do not belong to those churches and differ on doctrinal matters. We have so much else in common. You would however dismiss this as “liberal”, “confused”. Is it “confused” to be open to fellowhip? Aren’t you the one who is drawing up conditions for fellowhip?” Oct 8
In the case being discussed here, it is precisely YOUR group’s teaching that has caused this ‘now’ young lady to not be able to ‘fellowship’ with her own friends and family. I’m sure this girl’s friends and family have ‘so much else in common’ with her that they’ve built throughout the years while she was growing up in her own family. From others posting on here, it sounds as if hers was a close family PRIOR to her involvement with this SF group. But, because she ‘joined a new church’ and moved in with this man and his family, she no longer has a close relationship with her own family or friends. Is it merely a coincidence in timing? or a result of vehement and out of context teaching of Luke 14:26 done by YOUR church that has caused this relationship to be severed? It does not appear that her family or friends have severed the bonds and ties she had, rather the other way around. Maybe they don’t believe exactly the same thing concerning doctrine. But, does that mean they can’t continue to enjoy the same hobbies or recreational activities they once did together; things like going to the movies, the fair, the park, horseback riding, hiking, the lake, the amusement park, vacations, holidays, concerts, plays, etc. Just because one joins a ‘new church’ doesn’t mean one can’t just hang out with one’s own family.
Living in his home and having virtually no real fellowshipping with others outside of this SF group are two things which cause this group to look so cultish. Other cultic characteristics demonstrated by this group include but are not limited to: keeping the youth so busy with ‘"in-house entertainment" and "work projects" that can keep these youth from fleeing to the "world"’. These activities also keep them so busy inside the group that they don’t have time for activities with their OWN friends and OWN families.
‘As Kare Smith once put it: If we can keep them working hard for us, then they will not be able to go into the world as they will have no time to think of it.’
Although they claim they don’t believe their leaders, Elias Aklaksen, J O Smith, and Kares Smith are infallible, the many references testify otherwise. Placing intense emphasis on teaching verses such as Luke 14:26 out of context is another classic cult characteristic specifically designed to separate loved ones. Adding and/or twisting words to the Bible is yet another common cultic tactic which has been observed here. Add to that the secrets, threats, lies, and deceptive tactics and the evidence continue to mount.
Rssnspy6: “Using your analogy of the doctor... SF believes that the doctor has to at least know what the symptons/warning signs of the disease are (lusts and desires of the flesh) for Him to be able to cure them. The 'symptoms,' if not treated properly, cause sickness/sin. How else would He know what to prescribe if He didn't know the warning signs?”
Because God, who is Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Omnipresent, came to earth to reveal Himself to mankind in the flesh, He knows everything. He already knows the symptoms/warning signs – Jesus was with God from the beginning (John 1:1) when He created us and knows our every thought.
There are many doctors who have never had diabetes themselves, but they know the warning signs/symptoms and the proper protocol used in order to treat diabetes. And, as John mentioned, symptoms arise as a ‘result’ of the disease; they are not the cause of the disease. In this case, the symptoms have been revealed as undermining the taxpaying parents of a community, divisiveness, threatening, lying, false accusations, critical spirits, name calling, secretive behaviors, lack of self-control, fear.
"But being happy and content is no sign that these prisoners really know Jesus Christ "--Wasn't it you that brought out the verse that 'you shall know them by their fruits'? Aren't (true) happiness and contentment fruits?
According to God’s Word, the ‘fruit’ of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Happiness and contentment are not among that list. This is God’s definition.
“Did you just say that jarsmom was 'simple?' Oi.”
Missed that one. Where was it?
“In my personal experience other churches focus on the fruits of the spirit (love, gentleness, self-control, etc) that are the result of a life of victory over that sin--without really showing the way to get those virtues.”
“Without getting at the root of the problem there is no way to layer on enough love and gentleness to cover sin because it will always show through.”
What is displayed by the SF doesn’t appear to be ‘a life of victory over sin’. Its fruits manifests themselves more in unsubstantiated fear, hate, jealousy, negativity and criticism, threats, isolation and separation, exclusion, lack of self-control, intimidation, coercion, manipulation, anger, holding grudges. Those behaviors are NOT fruits of the Spirit nor virtuous. Your emphasis is on ‘getting at the root of the problem’. I’m assuming that you’re meaning the problem of sin. So, how do YOU believe one is to ‘get at the root of this problem’ in order to ‘get these virtues’?
‘Mainstream’ Christianity believes AND teaches that in order to become a Christian, a follower of Christ, we are to accept that Jesus is Who He actually said He is (God coming to the earth in human flesh (Phil.2:6-8, Eph.4:8-10, Jn.10:30) and the exact representation of God (Heb.l:3) Who cannot be seen except in the form of Jesus (Jn 1:18, Jn10:30, John 14:6-7). The Bible says that if we believe that He took all of our sins on Himself (2 Cor.5:21) and paid the price once for all and for all time we don’t have to spend eternity in hell but rather have a place in heaven (2 Cor.5:19). He died a brutal and painful death on the cross as a propitiation for the sins of each one who confesses Him as Lord and Savior (Rom.10:9). When we become a Christian and we confess Him as Lord and Savior of our life, He enters as the Holy Spirit (John 14:15-21,26). Through the work of the Holy Spirit and by reading and studying God’s laws, we will be made aware what sin is, such as lying, threatening, cursing, stealing, murdering, drunkenness, selfishness, hateful or lustful thoughts, hurting other people, etc. The Holy Spirit is there to convict us of our sins and be our counselor to help us be obedient to Christ (John 14:15-21, 26). It is a relationship between Christ and the believer. Although we are now a Christian, we are still in the flesh and we will still sin (1Jn 1:8). The Bible says that when we are convicted of our sins, if we confess our sins to Him, He will forgive us of our sins and purify us from unrighteousness (1Jn1:8-10). As we become more obedient to Christ and are truly repentant of our sin, one will begin to display the fruits of the spirit, not because of our hard work and efforts, but because of the work of the Holy Spirit dwelling within us.
‘Mainstream’ Christianity also teaches people how to study their own Bible and encourage each to read his/her own Bible, pray, and have a quiet time alone with God daily. It is very apparent that ‘true’ Christians from many different denominations or fellowships live what they learn from God’s Word and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Is everyone perfect and is every single one of them going to always behave as Christ would? No, for several reasons. Some of the people who ‘attend church’ aren’t Christians, they just ‘attend church’ so when they don’t ‘act’ like a Christian, it appears as if they are a hypocrite– saying one thing and acting another. Some may not have been convicted of certain sins as of yet. Some may be convicted of sins and know they are sinning, yet not really care (they’re giving in to the temptation of sin). But, one thing is for sure, over the years, all of the ‘mainstream’ preachers I’ve been acquainted with have had an earnest desire to love and obey Christ and love others enough to spread the message of salvation through Jesus Christ around the globe. Are they all perfect? No, nor will they pretend to be. They know they’re sinners in need of a Savior and they’ll admit it. They, too have to turn to Christ for help in their time of need when temptations arise. Looking at the Bible, one can see that the ONLY perfect person was Jesus Christ. Noah, Moses, Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, Jonah, David, Paul, Peter: none of them were perfect either but God knew their heart and loved them and used them for His purpose.
For Harold
Thank you for your comments in response to my post. I would like to say some things however :
In response to “I understand your point about the fact that there are good people who exhibit Godly behavior in many different denominations and religions.”
I have not mentioned anything about good people of other religions. I am talking about Christians who believe the Bible and everything in it but choose to believe that Jesus was peccable but did not sin. Often when I bring into the discussion the point about Christians with differing interpretations of Scripture my words are understood as though I talk about all religions and universal goodness. I do not.
In response to “What does that have to do with the situation here in Owasso?”. True this has none. This is purely a doctrinal question and I was hoping for a doctrinal answer from those who felt strongly about it. I have previously offered to take/host these doctrinal discussions elsewhere for those who are interested so as not to clutter this blog with such exclusive doctrinal posts. Those who would like to answer this further without taking away the emphasis of this discussion can perhaps do so on my blog. I have posted a link here.
http://tomorrowyoumaydie.blogspot.com/
In response to your description of the teachers conduct and your statement “Is this what you consider to be honorable to God?”
No, if you are right this is dishonorable to God.
Your statement “If SF members want to look the other way and associate themselves with this kind of evil…”
You do have me thinking here. Yes if they are SF and I am SF I am therefore associated with it. Am I looking the other way? I think not. I think the number of those visiting the blog are being aware of the situation, when Owasso would otherwise not have been in their usual sphere of influence. Are we refusing to act… I think every SF one who visits this blog will have second thoughts on why or how he relates to SF and his family ties. IT will consider them to rethink their behavior if they have not already done so themselves. A contributor in Ukraine for example cannot be held to task for being unable to act in Owasso, but he can definitely prevent such instances repeating in his own home fellowship. Isn’t that a positive effect of the many who have contributed to the blog? I think so.
I will post more later in response to specific questions.
END
For Sophie
Thanks for your comments.
In response to your statement “ In the case being discussed here, it is precisely YOUR group’s teaching that has caused this ‘now’ young lady to not be able to ‘fellowship’ with her own friends and family”.
Yes the SF group in Owasso is being discussed here. I grant that. My post regarding the peccability issue is not related to the Owasso situation. Since Harold, you and John have echoed the sentiment that such an issue is not related to Owasso I have opened up a parallel statement on my blog. Do feel free to comment. I will continue to post here as needed.
Your statement : “As Kare Smith once put it: If we can keep them working hard for us, then they will not be able to go into the world as they will have no time to think of it.”
I have seen what happens to the youth of today in my own city. I have seen them get into drugs, sex and alcohol. I have seen budding lives ruined. I personally think if a Church can offer activities for youth that can keep them from the world (in the actual sense of the word “world”) then it is good. However if such activites also causes them to disregard their families the whole aspect of church activities has to be relooked at. Such a relooking is possible even now in the SF. I am sure people reading this blog will hopefully be judging themselves about this. So I agree with the statement if one considers the right usage of the word “world”.
Your statement “He already knows the symptoms/warning signs – Jesus was with God from the beginning (John 1:1) when He created us and knows our every thought.”
I agree with the thrust of your statement that Jesus did not “need” to go through everything we went through to understand us. He did not need to suffer the disease to cure it as the doctor analogy rightly made clear.
However I believe He chose to be peccable and “suffer being tempted” (Heb 2:18 ) although He did not need to.
END
Funnyman's attempt IMHO is to create a blog on doctrine so as to segregate and cover up an integral aspect of why the SF can be termed a cult/cultistic/sect in terms of its doctrine.
False doctrine is also related to wrong behavioural practicess and so this blog is integral and has integrity because it brings all these aspects together as one.
Further, Funnyman on his blog does not want any group to be identified as having false doctrine. Why?
He only wants an airy-fairy discussion on his blog that remains abstract but is unable to pinpoint heresies and cult groups that peddle strange wares to believers.
This is another red herring to steer this blog away from being a steadfast witness to SF's false doctrines and twisting of Scriptures as well as behavioural aberrances.
For John
Thanks for your posts.
In response to your statement :
“The truth perhaps is that the SF leadership is using Funnyman and RssanSpy to test how they can influence or change the direction of this blog …”
My comments on this post are my own and have not been at the behest of the SF leadership.
Your statement “All key marriages are inside the cult”.
In a sense you are right. There are large number of youth in different churches so that the chance of an SFer marrying another SFer is understandably very high. I think this is more an aspect of situations and numbers than anything else.
Your statement “Perhaps someone like Funnyman might be "allowed" to marry outside SF but he would be looked down upon and his wife..”
The question of “allowing” a person to marry usually does not arise. People are free to marry who they choose. Marrying within the SF though usually the norm is not a requisite. Will I then be “looked down upon…?” I do not think so.
“ One can never know who the leaders of different SF fellowships are”
You could always ask the local fellowship or write to them and I am sure you can get the info. Lack of information does not mean it is meant to be hidden. Leadership in local assemblies is not usually documented.
“More recently SF members have been promised both praise and rewards if they keep advertising this site”
Could you provide the reference for this statement?
“presenting a certain IMAGE to the world”…John what would you expect? That the SF presents all its dirty linen on its main webpage? Since when is it a crime to present happy faces on a webpage? “Media savvy”- is that a crime?
END
For all :
Some general comments having followed this discussion for about a month.
There may be behavioral patterns that have destroyed families and doctrinal differences but perhaps there is no deliberate “web of deceit” to be exposed.
When one believes in this deliberate “web of deceit” where SF members are cultists waiting for unsuspecting prey to fall into their lair, then everything one sees in the SF can be explained to prove this. The good…. “O that is a show… an attraction”. The bad : Of course… what did you expect!. The godly : “O they are seemingly Godly…”. The membership … “O that is the exclusive Brother’s ring….” The lack of naming leaders “ O they are hiding the true leaders”. The profit making business “O Kaare is making money …” the freewill offerings “ O they are robbing the innocents”, taking someone to court “O that is how they hunt you down….”, making peace with Zac “O they bought him off so that he would not criticize them.”, when SF members are silent “O they are told by their leaders to back off from this site”, when SF members post “O they are told by their leaders to divert this site”, when an SF member is found to be different “O he is not really an SF member” etc.
Somewhere along the line I think one has to firmly say that there are faults in the SF. Genuine faults. However the discussion on this blog has blurred the lines of the true and the false, the fact and the fiction the honest and the liar.
The true issue of this blog was SF behavior in Owasso. This was something personal to the family concerned and to those who knew the family. However this blog has been converted to a arena where mud can be publically and anonymously thrown at the SF.
Does the SF deserve this. Perhaps. Their conduct often has been far from Christian and far from the Christ they claim to follow. The SF perhaps deserves to be in the stocks. But seeing the reaction of the crowd and the way they treat the man in the stocks makes me wonder... The subtle glee, the unrestrained anger, the verbal outbursts…the desire to see someone punished wherever, whoever and however far he may be… this too is unchristian.
Claiming this “web of deceit” is just as easy. It can easily be proved as I mentioned above. Everything can point to this “web of deceit”. It can never be denied on the blog.
But I stand by my statements still. The SF is a church. The SF has its faults. Cultistic behavior in regions … perhaps. This cannot be denied. A cult as an organization – NO!. The SF members have commited mistakes and caused wounds, often grievous. But if you come to the SF looking for the SF “web of deceit” you will not find it as it does not exist.
END
For John
(in response to your latest post that were posted before I finished pasting everyting here)
Thanks for taking the time to check out my blog.
The reason I ask for a non denominational discussion is because I feel often my belonging to the SF causes people to react more at me than at my posts.
The reason I did not post it in this blog is because I do not want to clutter up this blog with discussions that many in the blog want to move on from.
Anyone who wants to quote from what is posted there can easily cut and paste the same matter.
I am not trying to hide anything. I have made my opinions on the SF doctrine very clear until we reached no headway in our discussion and I thought we both agreed to move on.
Your comments on my blog to will be welcome. Feel free to criticize my statements for what they are worth, and not me just because I am SF. :-)
Thank you again
funnyman
To John
"what SF teaches its members is that anyone who leaves is "anti-christ""--Can you prove this? Do you have an SF article or Brunstad soundbyte that says his?
"It is wonderful to see you look up the names of Hodge etc to try to find a defence for Smith and Bratlie, etc. I thought these SF "fathers" we self-sufficient and did not need any back-up!!"--I did not go searching for 'backup' when I went looking for other people that believed in the peccability of Christ. I went looking to bring some perspective to the DEBATE regarding Jesus. There is a debate because there are two sides, both defensible. What I said about the majority leaning towards impeccability (quite significantly) still stands, but there are still two sides. I believe that there will come a day when the peccability argument will be completely denounced by 'mainstream' Christianity. The Bible scholars will find some evidence that 'proves' Jesus was in fact God on earth.
Yet, when we read the Bible, specifically the verses funnyman shared (1 Cor 1:18-end), we see that the scholars and the learned and the scribes are not on the right path. They are called foolish. Paul preached Christ crucified (this wasn't on Calvary). There is a mystery regarding this that isn't discernable by the a scholarific (if I may use that term) approach. Yet all of Christianity has followed this scientific method of studying the Bible and the scrolls and the original languages and the middle east to try to pin it down. It isn't possible to study your way into 'knowing' Christ. The verse says "That I might know Him...and the fellowship of His sufferings..." Phil 3.
Still looking for the texts from the cult writings.
Regarding the doctor analogy:
I tried to continue your analogy. It doesn't completely work because of the way it is set up. It also doesn't work because 'your' Jesus was God on earth and 'my' Jesus was "of the seed of David according to the flesh." We (including Harold and Sophie) will never be able to talk on the same plane because it is just apples and oranges. Impeccable vs peccable. You can say that Jesus as peccable is pathetic in your lofty way, but I know that a peccable Jesus gives me personal access to God through Him because I am exactly as He was in this world. An impeccable Jesus is a fantastic champion that came and did 'everything' for me. All I'd have to do is confess Him, live to the best I could (sin and all), and Jesus blood would cover me. But Jesus blood only covers me "If we walk in the light as He is in the light..." 1 John 1. This is an understanding that 'mainstream' Christianity does not practice (in my observation).
I don't want to argue apples and oranges anymore. I've started to realize that it defaces the value of Christianity. WE DISAGREE. I am firm in my faith. You are firm in yours.
To Sophie
“Did you just say that jarsmom was 'simple?' Oi.”--John wrote that jarsmom had 'simplicity' on October 8. It sounded odd to me.
To Harold
Regarding Revelations. You may not understand the entire book or be able to relate how it is all related to our time... But you can at least say what you believe. I'm just asking about one part, the harlot that rides that back of the beast. You must have read what a Bible scholar thought it was and said, "hey, that sounds about right."
Regarding 'peace and civility.' I shared what someone very close to the situation told me.
You said, "This family has always been peaceful and civil in trying to maintain a relationship with their daughter. It was the sons of this SF leader that assaulted the girl’s family at the wedding while the other SF members and family members watched."--This makes me doubt everyone. I heard that the father of the bride threatened the groom with "unmentionable threat" if the groom ever 'hurt' his daughter...
What it comes down to, I say this from many miles away, is that there should be reconciliation on both sides. Who is going to be the bigger 'man' and humble himself first and seek reconciliation? Act Christ-like? It seems as if we are crying over 3 year old spilled milk. Most of us on here don't even know half the story and NO ONE but God knows the full story. So it comes down to, "does SF have a destructiv doctrine that leads to situations like...?" Apples and oranges. One 'final' thought...
To all
I've changed my mind regarding this blog many times. I've asked myself many times if it would be beneficial to be involved in something like this or not. I wanted to 'defend' the SF against what I believed were false accusations. All defenses were turned into 'webs of deceit,' 'hidden agendas, etc. Many questions that are put forth aren't answered (thank you Harold for addressing Revelations) but are rather danced around. I am going to stop posting unless asked a direct question. Thank you Keith for the space.
RssanSpy:
Firstly, did you get "offended"? I think you are supposed to overcome such sinful feelings!
Secondly, why do you want me to quote the cult texts? You should help Brunstad become richer by buying those texts and reading them without questioning their veracity!
TO ALL
Here is a prime example of how cult leaders KNOW IT ALL PERFECTLY WELL. From Bratlie's book SO GREAT A SALVATION:
"Many people wonder what it was that Jesus wrote on the ground (when Mary Magdalene was brought to him). Some say he was just doodling in the "sand". It doesn't say "sand" here and it is difficult (if not impossible) to write in sand. Others say that He showed how humble He was by bending down to write while waiting for an answer from the Father. Usually people mention what suits them and leave out what doesn't. PERSONALLY I AM IN NO DOUBT ABOUT WHAT JESUS WROTE. I believer He wrote what was written further in the law: You shall not covet (lust). And when he bowed down again, I believe He wrote what is written further in the law: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them."
It is interesting that Bratlie knows what Jesus wrote on the "sand". The man who says that in that section in the Bible the word "sand" is not even mentioned, then goes on to state arrogantly that HE KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT JESUS WROTE in the "sand"!!!!
This is what speculation and ignorance can lead to, total lack of context or understanding! And how people lap all this up as infallible God's truth!
TO ALL
More of Bratlie's venom against other groups of Christians:
Citing Eph 2:15, 16 he goes on to say:
"We see from these verses that the two - Jews and Gentiles - became one new man on the cross. This is the church, the body of Christ. Eph. 3:4-6. What a mystery! Where can you find it? YOU WILL NEVER FIND IT AMONG THE VARIOUS RELIGIOUS ORGANISATIONS WITH THEIR DIFFERENT NAMES.They are in stark contrast to the church, which is the body of Christ. THE VERY FACT THAT THEY TRY TO FIND SO MANY FINE BIBLICAL NAMES FOR THEIR SO-CALLED CHURCHES IS A POWERUL TESTIMONY AGAINST THEM....
John 17:20-21
Where can you find a church today in which this prayer of Jesus HAS BEEN FULFILLED? YOU CANNOT FIND IT AMONG ALL THE DENOMINATIONS WITH THEIR VARIOUS RELIGIOUS NAMES. They deny that Jesus came in the flesh, that he partook of flesh and blood just as the children ....
THEREFORE THEY HAVE NO PART IN THE GOSPEL WHICH WAS PROMISED THROUGH THE PROPHETS ..."
If you read carefully, you can see how these cult leaders laid the foundations of a group that hates all other Christians and other Christian churches. They abuse other "so-called churches" for having names but the SF itself has a NAME TODAY - Den Kristelige Menighet. And the affiliated "so-called churches" are called DKM Brunstad, DKM Oslo, DKM Huntsworth, etc etc.
Funnyman et al
Can you understand that sf has
created the impression of creating
a web of deciet. This family, they
feel, has lost their child. I know
that sf sometimes would rather dis-
miss the myriad of human emotions
(God given)by pigenholing them into
tidy little compartments called soulishness. I think sometimes serious matters get ignored and
this makes for very nasty problems
They may look ok on the surface but, underneath there are cess-
pools of hurt. I heard brother
Vinson speak of this one time, he
said I like to hold my wife's hand, It makes me feel good, that
isn't soulish. Crucifying the
flesh is mandated by scripture and
cant be by passed, but is only a
part of bring healing to the human
heart( the abundant life).
All that being said, can you and
the other SFers try to relaate to
the plight of this family, includ-
the leading bro in Owasso, how do
you not get that your behavior is
not seen as duplicitious esp since
you have forbad your own child from
seeing an outsider, how would you
feel if she took off with him and
the minute she turned 18 went to
Vegas and married him and left the
church, how would you feel if this were all done at the behest of his
family all without you knowing.
Then to top it all off she refused
to talk to you, because they had
persuaded you that you were the
enemy. Just a little food for
thought.
So I guess that is my main idea, SF
creates certian impressions that
they in turn say oh we dont do that
or no one ever says any thing like
that. It is the impression that is
created. See what I mean. All of
us are guilty of that from time to
time. I also want to point out
I can personally vouch for the SF
that I am familiar with they never
forbad members to see fam members
that were not along. The church
usually took priority, fellowship
was always a priority, but most
members had healthy relationships
with their non SF family members,
myself included.
Russian
I dont care if John thinks I am
simple. I am not here to win an
essay or writing contest. I dont
however think that is what he ment.
I think he ment I was simplifying
my ideas.
To John
I am not offended by anything on this blog. You are correct that I am supposed to get victory over being offended. I believe that I have in regards to this blog.
I asked you to quote the texts by way of reminder...You said you would post them. I didn't want you to forget to post where SF leaders wrote that Jesus had a 'body of sin' and an 'old man.'
To jarsmom
I did not mean that John meant to slight you, but rather that it seemed an odd thing to say and I didn't understand what he meant.
For Jarsmom
Thank you for your post. And I get the thrust of your point and agree with it.
I cannot claim to understand what the family has gone through. That would be presumptious of me. However I think I can relate to it a little through experiences I have gone through. Yes the family is hurt. Though I defend many things on the blog post and some of my posts do not include a reference to Owasso, that is on my mind.
to be contd...
For all
Please understand that a rebuttal of many of the allegations on this blog are not a denial of what happened in Owasso. I repeat this again and again.
Something has happened that has brought out the double standards in the SF in a local area. It is good that those in the local area have the ability to spread this information with us. The Bible does say that what is whispered in one ear will be proclaimed on the rooftops and in a sense that is happening. As Christians our conduct has to be worthy to stand public scrutiny. If one is tested and found wanting one can only hang ones head in shame. Evil deserves to be exposed. It should not be covered up.
However I find that this discussion has sometimes crossed the limits of what I would be proud to call Christian. I search the posts for those who have a desire to see something positive come out of the discussion. I search each post to see if there are any who have a desire to help the SF. I find very few. I instead find some who are willing to pull out all the stops in their effort against the SF using Owasso as an excuse.
I search my posts and find that my posts and statements have also been found wanting. They have often departed from love, to just being a reaction to a person. I seem to have churned the waters and come out muddier than before.
to be contd...
RssanSpy:
I did not say that Jarsmom is "simple" - I said she has "simplicity".
The reference is to a portion of scripture that commends those who have a "simplicity of faith" in Christ Jesus.
They will not be led away by arguments of Jesus not having deity or being peccable and other strange claims made through "revelation".
It was a compliment.
Central question:
How can one help the SF when it is convinced that it is God's Only Church, THE BODY OF CHRIST ON EARTH, that its FATHERS are infallible, that it can do anything and get away with it, that it alone has the secret to eternal life and that IT IS SINLESS IN ITS COLLECTIVE ACTIONS?
The SF doesn't need any help. The sect is so "happy and contented that together we can be" while all the others are harlots and low life, as their song says! It is those who are hurt by the SF that needs help!
Yes Owasso happened. I do not know the full details. I am sure that the SF has its own version. Russian seems to have heard it. I have not heard it as yet. I have only Keith and Harold’s. I have no reason to doubt them, but in every argument those involved are unconsciously unaware of their own mistakes and are very aware of the opponents. So given one side of the story I have made many comments on this blog. But there is an SF view and it will not be all lies either.
There is a big difference between someone acting foolishly and unwisely and the claim about a deliberate web of deceit. I find it surprising that the SF (which includes my local church) is described as a cult where we are waiting for unsuspecting young people to fall into our lair, that we believe Bratlie and JO Smith are infallible, that we forbid people to marry, that we believe that Brunstad is the “new Jerusalem”, that we split families, that our leaders are ‘gods’etc. I could understand if this were just verbal rhetoric from someone who is hurt. But I cannot understand as to why one would try to pass it off as the objective truth. There are too many SF churches that do not conform to this view.
If one skims through from the start of the blog one will see that it initially began with search for what the SF was about and whether it was a cult. Travel forward now and we see that the question is answered many times over, people have taken sides on this question and many of the posts now reflect more a ridicule of the SF rather than a genuine search for truth.
I have posted extensively on this blog and honestly find myself repeating what I have said before. However of late I have been getting the feeling that this discussion has passed from a search for truth, to the judgement to now the punishment.
If I have altered the tone of this blog as I was alleged I at least hope it has been towards something good. If I have crossed the limits of what you would be proud to call Christian you have my sincere apologies. This is especially to John at whom many of my posts have been targeted. I too realize that my posts have been targeted at you personally rather than the content of your posts. I apologize for that. I still disagree with the content though.
I will continue to post on this blog. I spend a lot of time on it, not with the aim that the SF comes clean, but with the hope that those reading this blog can judge themselves over the effects of their words and behaviour.
May this discussion continue to shed light on what is wrong and above all be one which can bring glory to God.
END
Funnyman: Thanks for your thoughtful posts and what seems to be a willingness to consider the faults of the SF organization. Every organization made up of imperfect men will have its faults. Smith’s Friends is not immune to that, neither is my church.
My goal here is not to sling mud at an organization just for the fun of it. I claim to be a Christian and I see somebody who also claims to be Christian whose behavior is not Christ like. It is our duty as a Christian brother to follow the Matthew 18 principle and confront the person. The father of this girl confronted this SF leader in person, just the two of them. This was unproductive. This father later asked to meet with the relevant parties in mediation with a local Christian counselor before the wedding. This was rejected. Now these misdeeds are being taken before the SF “church”.
I don’t regard this as an attack on this man nor Smith’s Friends, but a rebuke from fellow Christians on what most people here would regard as immoral behavior within the body of Christ.
“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” 2 Tim 3:16-17
I have to ask you to explain your following statement:
“The subtle glee, the unrestrained anger, the verbal outbursts…the desire to see someone punished wherever, whoever and however far he may be… this too is unchristian.”
Who are you referring to? Who has been gleeful? Where is the unrestrained anger, the verbal outbursts? Are you referring to my posts? Are you referring to events here in Owasso?
I agree that such behavior is not Christ like but I do not take this discussion lightly and I for one apologize if you have read this into my writings. I consider this is a serious matter with eternal ramifications.
I also refuse to go along with the idea that either SF or this local SF leader is the victim here. If this man had behaved in an upstanding moral way, this blog would not exist. It is the result of HIS behavior that started this discussion. He is not the victim. If anyone is a victim it is the girl and her family, AND the other young people who have been affected as well. She is not the only one. We can’t forget them or their families.
Russian: I have to take exception to your statement “It isn't possible to study your way into 'knowing' Christ.” There have been several notable scholars such as Josh McDowell who have started out as unbelievers attempting to disprove the gospel of Christ, only to become believers themselves. I believe that if anyone takes the time to study the scriptures on an intellectual level there is only one reasonable conclusion; that Jesus is who He said He is, the Son of the living God who created everything.
I also want to address this comment of yours: “I heard that the father of the bride threatened the groom with "unmentionable threat" if the groom ever 'hurt' his daughter...”
First of all, I have no idea if you are married or not. But I have been married for many years and I am still accountable to my father-in-law for the safety, and well being of HIS daughter. That is not a legal relationship. That is a moral relationship because I respect the relationship between him and his daughter. She may be my wife but she was his daughter first. So it is understandable in this context that the father, under the circumstances, would express that opinion to the groom.
Second, the reason that this is an “unmentionable threat” is because there was no “threat” from the father to “mention”. It is therefore “unmentionable”. You should verify your facts before slinging mud like that.
You said: “It seems as if we are crying over 3 year old spilled milk.”
What I believe you are trying to say is that what is done is done and we should just shut up, sit down, and be quiet while this man continues to harm others and pervert the name of Christ. Sorry, I can’t do that. I will continue to speak the truth as long as I am able.
I suppose you believe the government should let Roman Polanski go because his conviction in court happened so long ago. I don’t believe that. He is a convicted criminal who fled the country to escape justice and he should serve the sentence for his crime. I don’t care how long ago it was. That is the right thing to do.
You said “This makes me doubt everyone”. You should doubt everyone. I have no problem with you doubting what I say. You shouldn’t believe everything you read, from anybody, “…because many false prophets have gone out into the world.” 1 Jn 4:1. I just encourage you to check your facts before you write them.
"Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses." 2 Cor 13:1
Thank you Harold for your comments on my post
I do need to clarify when I made the statement :
“The subtle glee, the unrestrained anger, the verbal outbursts….”
They do not refer to your posts. Neither are they referring to Owasso as I do not know any of the events there save what is brought out on this blog. They were an indirect reference to the tenor of John’s posts. But then when I think about this again it was more my reactions to John’s posts and were unnecessary, for which John you have my sincere apology. I did get carried away and am perhaps wrong.
I fully agree with you that these discussions are to be taken seriously. I try to pray and reread my posts twice or thrice to weed out unnecessary words. I have not done this for some posts, and they have reflected more my state of mind rather than its content.
I will post more about your other points later
END
Funnyman:
1. Apology accepted.
There is no glee when one is pointing out "error".
There is only sorrow and hope that the people in error might come to their senses.
My purpose here has been primarily to point out that SF practices the ancient heretical doctrine which shows Jesus as a man who became God, the exact doctrine that the Eastern religions believe in and which synchronises with what the Jews and Muslims believe. This doctrine explicitly denies the deity of Jesus while he was on earth. His deity was the revelation that the Father gave to Peter.
2. Your wrote:
“More recently SF members have been promised both praise and rewards if they keep advertising this site” Could you provide the reference for this statement?
You try to cover up things happening in SF - about the system of marriages within the cult, and about the website. Here is a communique sent out by Brunstad to its members. This was sent to me by a friend to whom I spoke after your demand for a reference.
Wake up!
ON WWW.BRUNSTAD.ORG
Information Regarding an Important Competition in Connection with www.brunstad.org
01.09.2008
Dear friends!
The Internet is a natural place for people to search for information, and Kåre J. Smith has set in motion work to make our website, www.brunstad.org, our most important missionary tool. We now want to start a competition that will help information regarding the church and the gospel become easily available for people who are searching.
Purpose of the Competition
·Make it easier for searching people to hear the gospel of God and find information regarding Brunstad Christian Church that can guide them.
·Increase the friends' awareness of the website and the need for new and varied articles, so that the website becomes increasingly more helpful.
·Increase the number of visitors to www.brunstad.org
Competition Goals and Time Perspectives
The goal of this competition is to get the most visitors from your country on www.brunstad.org. It is a joint competition in the sense that each country is one group, but nonetheless, it is important that each church becomes involved and follows up with this competition locally. The youth leader in each church is responsible for getting this competition off the ground and for maintaining the friends' interest and focus on the competition.
Time Perspective: Measurements of number of visitors to the website in each country will start on September 1, 2008 and will end on December 31, 2008.
Competition Rules
In order to have the same conditions for smaller and larger churches/countries, we will calculate the number of people in each country in the same way as for David's Columns. Each country will then be measured according to the percentage increase and total number of vistors compared to church size during the designated time period.
Updated graphs will be sent out on a regular basis so that everyone can follow along with where they are in comparison to other countries. The country with greatest increase of visitors will win the competition!
(continued)
(WEBSITE CONTINUED)
Suggestions to Increase the Number of Visitors on www.brunstad.org
The suggestions below are meant to bring inspire the churches into becoming creatively involved in this competition on many different levels. We are open to better or more developed ideas!
·Newspaper Announcements
·T-shirts sporting the name of the website or other advertising slogans
·Business Cards
Local Churches can take responsibility for printing business cards for the young people (and anyone else who is willing). The cards would have www.brunstad.org written on one side along with follow-up sentence or a question. The cards should be given out based on a personal relationship with people ypu have spoken to, or those who have an interest in our life and faith. The cards are not meant as mass distribution of "advertising."
·Talk to people with love and respect! It may be more beneficial to find the few people who are really interested than to distribute flyers to everyone on your street.
Use www.brunstad.org as your homepage
Bring up www.brunstad.org when talking to authorities or people at school etc. The website is also meant for people who are curious or want general information about the church
Write an article for the website!
Follow along with how your country is doing in the competition and participate yourself! Find ways to increase the interest and enthusiasm in your home church!
Regardless of what suggestions your church decides to implement, it is extremely important to participate with enthusiasm, and a personal commitment and motivation. Begin today!
It is important that the youth leaders/youth workers take responsibility for helping the young people understand what methods they can use to share information about the church and the gospel. Younger youth especially often need a little guidance in this area, so they are not thoughtless or forget what is appropriate in their efforts to share information (ex. Facebook, Piczo, blogs etc.).
The brunstad.org website editing team is working to develop a website where the gospel about freedom from sin can easily reach out to people who have a heavenly calling. However, this website is also intended as a fountain of information, understanding, and edification for our own children and young people who are growing up-in this way it is a missionary tool for people in the church and people who are not in the church! Participate by creating enthusiasm, zeal, and understanding in connection with this important task that Jesus has given His disciples. (Matt. 28:18-20)
Thank you John for accepting my apology and for your comments.
Thank you also for taking the trouble to trace out the reference for your statement. I greatly appreciate that.
I will reply in more detail later
I haven't posted for a few months but after reading John's posts, I fully agree with him.
As a former member, I can undeniably say that SF operates in a cult-like manner.
You mention their opposition to other Christian groups and this is at the core of the message preached by the 'brothers'.
The message is that the other Christians represent the harlot and that Smith Friend's represent the bride of Christ. You can read this in Bratlie's book, 'the bride and the harlot'.
Smith's Friends believe that Brunstad, the spiritual home of their church in Norway is 'new jerusalem' on earth and the capital of Christendom. They believe that all other Christian groups do the bidding of the anti-christ and preach the false gospel.
They believe they are the first fruits chosen by Christ.
They ridicule and bemoan all other Christ groups and evangelists.
They regard their leading brothers as prophets on earth and as you said infallible. Whatever their 'prophet's' say is ordained by God and cannot be questioned, if questioned, they accuse you of being unfaithful.
If members leave the group, they will attempt to follow every aspect of their lives and if something goes wrong, they will mention it in the meeting how 'something went wrong with so-so and the blessing of God has left them'.
This is why 97% of the groups growth comes from within, having large families etc.
Needless to say, this group is un-christian to the core, no matter what they claim publicly.
Harold: "I believe that if anyone takes the time to study the scriptures on an intellectual level there is only one reasonable conclusion; that Jesus is who He said He is, the Son of the living God who created everything."
SF preachers work hard to convince people to destroy the "intellect" and "reasoning" or "theology". If they did use their "reason" they would come out of their bondage to the cult and its brainwashing.
The SF leaders continually preach against "using your reason" or your "intellect". In the archives is an old message by Arild Tombre that says "Off with your head" - that is, "lose your reason". SF prefer mindless zombies and work hard to achieve that.
Bratlie used to attack "harlot" churches saying: "The harlots workers are merchants and the harlot is called Babylon, the city of commerce."
This is exactly what Brunstad has become. Key leaders go to other countries to source materials for the gift shop in Brunstad, they run five-star restaurants, there is a pile of Brunstad merchandise sold at really high prices - the literature, framed and sketched idolised photographs of the "five" leaders who formed the core of the church, paintings of JO Smith and other leaders, piggy banks in the shape of Brunstad, music CDs, t-shirts, housing, real estate, horse equipment, etc etc.
If one wants to see a successful city of merchants and commerce, here it is: Brunstad, the New Babylon sold to the innocent as "New Jerusalem", it has become exactly what Bratlie and others did not want it to be.
Now the churches have a "name", now there is organisation and commerce, and CENTRAL CONTROL from Brunstad, the Vatican and the Pope is Kare Smith.
This group has become just like the "harlot" denominations it has condemned and that in itself is its judgement from God.
John: You are giving a very detailed description of Brunstad Conference Center. Have you ever been there? And eventually when?
You wrote:
"Key leaders go to other countries to source materials for the gift shop in Brunstad"
Feel free to publish their names.
and:
"They run five-star restaurants"
What are the names of these five-star restaurants?
more:
"There is a pile of Brunstad merchandise sold at really high prices"
What is "really high prices"?
In an earlier post you wrote:
"This is what speculation and ignorance can lead to, total lack of context or understanding!"
You earlier made a statement that SF teaches anyone who leaves is "anti-christ". And when being asked by Russion to prove it, you are giving him the burden of proof. If Russian published everything from SF that does not contain this statement (which I am sure is everything), it would still not have worked as a proof. (I believe he would have been accused for spamming too.)
I hope that your motivation to post on this blog is to provide truth and reveal lies. When your statements can not be proved to be right or wrong, the only thing we know is that they are something in between. I don't think the readers of this blog deserve such an uncertainty, and unproved statements are actually not very far from "speculation and ignorance".
Blogmaster:
Welcome back! You make so many assumptions and speculations.
The objective of this blog is not to name people though names have crept in now and then. It is to present another side of the public image Brunstad and the SF tries to project and to point out aspects of cultishness that that the sect tries to hide by means of its exclusivity and secrecy.
Perhaps the objectives are these:
1. SF is cult-like - what happened in Owasso is a result of cult-like brainwashing and isolation of an individual. This is the result of Brunstad teaching that families must be cut off and that people must separate from the "harlot". Many have suffered this in manner in Brunstad-controlled churches but they cannot speak of it as they are outnumbered and outgunned and anyway would prefer to move on with their scarred lives.
2. The SF doctrine is an ancient heresy seeking once again to take root and spreading with the use of money power and in the false guise of "evangelical nondenominational".
4. That this sect or cult believes that it is the ONLY CHURCH on earth, the BRIDE and all other Christians are "harlots" and "anti-christs" since they do not confess the central SF creed of CHRIST MANIFESTED IN THE FLESH.
3. That a number of people are being milked regularly and "voluntarily" of their finances and convinced to spend their time and energy in work-parties that build a financial empire they do not have any tangible stake in!
If people are made aware of these facts, that is sufficient. Then it is a matter of choice whether or not they want to be part of this sect and suffer the consequences.
On the issue of "anti-christ" Trygve Sandvik writes:
"Anti-christs spring up wherever the spirit of apostasy is prevalent. They have been in the church, for whenever one does not MAKE A CONSCIOUS EFFORT TO BE FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT OF GOD, one is driven into the spirit of anti-christ. In this way, all those who have loved the revelation of Christ (the SF revelation - my emphasis) are separated from those who do. God himself allows all those who have not received a love for the truth to be deceived."
SF leadership all the time watches and monitors its members to brand the ones who have questions or who do not "submit to the elders" as "anti-christs" and they move to isolate such people. SF believes in driving out people if they do not conform.
Those who are driven out or in the process of being driven out are first branded both behind their backs and in messages preached at meetings as "Balaam, Korah, Cain, Ananiah & Sapphira (if it is a couple), Dotrephes", etc. Once this branding is done, such people experience only ostracism. They are called "vessels unto dishonour" and "bad examples".
If they leave, after being pushed out, the SF applies the verse in
I John 2:
18 Boys (lads), it is the last time (hour, the end of this age). And as you have heard that the antichrist [he who will oppose Christ in the guise of Christ] is coming, even now many antichrists have arisen, which confirms our belief that it is the final (the end) time. 19 They went out from our number, but they did not [really] belong to us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us. But [they withdrew] that it might be plain that they all are not of us.
In other words, if you once were with SF and you leave, you are DAMNED, exactly as Al Fredo put it.
John, your comments exactly match my experiences as a former member of this group.
It is amazing how much emphasis they put on their leaders being prophets. I remember when the leader Kare Smith wrote a new book (Shepherd and prophet), immediately after-wards, we were told in meetings how great this book was and how we must purchase it. Later in meetings, the talkers were always quoting from this book to the same extent as the bible (God's word). They later organized competitions across all Smith's friends groups to ascertain which sf group had understood the book the most, to the rapturous applause of the leader (kare).
There is too much worshiping of the group's leaders and putting them above Christ. This is the hallmark of cultism. Especially when the bible becomes secondary to a book written by the leader.
Worst is their attitude towards other Christians, the fact that they believe only smith's friends are the bride of Christ and first fruits. They believe that Christ will not return until the gospel of Smith's friends is spread around the world. To this end, they utilize numerous fund raising mechanisms.
One example is the rort that is known as a-lag, where the SF leaders fool youth from their churches around the world to go to their capital 'brunstad' and donate their time free of charge to work in the SF leader's businesses. Be it horse equipment, the building industry etc. All in the name of God's work and spreading God's word around the world.
If one wants to attend a true bible-based church, I suggest avoiding this group, it's objectives and views are far from Christianity. They are deceitful, self-seeking and ignorant. I wish I could retake the years I spent being brainwashed as part of SF.
have i missed something - did el fedro have another user name earlier on??
John:
You wrote: "You make so many assumptions and speculations."
For the readers of your post, I don't think I need to comment that statement, as everyone can see how your judgement is pointing back to you. But to make sure you also understand it, I will show you a short example of how you twist facts into assumptions and speculations.
Trygve Sandvik writes that Anti-Christs have been within SF exactly as John (the apostle) writes, and that they have left the church. You twist this to be that SF consider everyone that leaves the church as Anti-Christs. In comparison: There were terrorists on the plane that crashed into Pentagon. That does not mean that everyone onboard were terrorist.
The spirit of Anti-Christ is to deny the need of God and the gospel, and people's humanity and good intentions is the new "God". This spirit rules the world today, and it certainly also tries to influence Christians as well. If I find out that I don't need The Holy Spirit to be my guide (which is very arrogant) I will be drawn towards Anti-Christ. In this point there is no difference between SF and any other church, as it is possible to be in any church and at the same time be influenced by the spirit of Anti-Christ. The Holy Spirit will prevent me from being occupied by Anti-Christ's spirit, and as The Holy Spirit can be received both in SF and other churches, I don't become an Anti-Christ if I leave SF to join another church. (But, if I leave because I am offended that I did not become the leader, I might be an Anti-Christ, but then I would probably have been it for some time already.)
Your description of a process of driving out people by monitoring, isolating, stigmatization, ostracism and cursing is not the way SF works. That is why most of the people leaving SF maintain good relations to family and friends in SF, and many of them also visit Brunstad or local meetings. As I have questioned the SF leadership a lot, I guess I would have experienced this process if it existed.
A correction to El Fedro: Horze does not have any activity at Brunstad. A couple of IEC-Hus employees have their office at Brunstad, but they have normal wages. About the SF leaders, Kaare Smith has already announced what the title of his next book will be: "Look, how great he is!" Who do you think this book will be about?
Blogmaster, Horze is strongly connected to Brunstad and Smith's venner.
In terms of Brunstad, are you denying that in the beginning of Horze a shop was operated out of Brunstad? And the horse events held at brunstad to promote horze? let's not forget the constant mention of Horze in the meetings and how Horze is a tool of God to expand Smith's Venner.
Let's not forget how K.Smith uses A-laget youth to work in his Horze empire across Europe.
The same applies to the Russian cabins (or wherever they're built now). Any business-owner would love free labor of deceived youths, just like K.Smith is receiving the benefits of now.
SF members know nothing about the financial activities of the group unless you are in the inner circle, like bernt aksel. Have members ever received an annual financial report? there is no transparency whatsoever.. despite having to have david's columns, take out mortgages to pay 'brunstad debt' etc.
Oh yeah blogmaster, what are you doing posting here? don't you remember what k.smith said about communicating with the 'opposition'. Does SF leadership still sprout on how bad it with with the Bekkevold's after the 91 'revival'?
Furthermore, why does K.Smith preach against contributing to charities or assisting those in Africa, as the bible says, windows and orphans? why does he refer to it as a 'waste of money' and that one should contribute to dkm instead?
How far away this group has gone from the path bratlie and j.o smith led it on.
El Fedro:
I have actually been working in the leadership of BCC for several years. I know a lot about the budgets as I have participated making some of them. In Norway it is very easy to get the annual financial reports of a company or organization. Just go to www.brreg.no (I don't know if all information is available in English, but at least it is in Norwegian). I don't know the laws in other countries, but every church in Norway is forced by law to present the annual result for all church members. In Norway you can also find out the annual income and how much a private person owns on the internet.
And, yes. I am denying that Horze was started from Brunstad. It has never been driven from Brunstad, but during the annual Arctic Equestrian Games they have held meetings there for Horze employees (most of them not members of SF). Still it is correct that Horze is strongly connected to SF.
I don't know which local church of SF you attended, but personally I can't remember last time I heard the Horze name in a SF meating. If Horze was a part of the weekly gospel in your local church, I also consider that as strange.
Kaare Smith has together with others started a lot of businesses in Finland, Russia, Ukraine etc. These businesses are making a lot of money, which normally had made him a very rich man. Instead he has used the business to develop possibilities for the churches in Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa and South America. In addition money collected in the churches go to projects in these continents.
The main reason that SF does not own the businesses in Russia is that it is almost impossible for a religious group to own anything in Russia. Even for a foreign company it is very difficult, and Kaare Smiths company was the first foreign company to own any property in Russia for ages.
Generally: The poor results of 50 years of economical help to Africa is very similar to "waste of money". The safest way to donate money to Africa is to donate it to an organization that is represented locally in Africa to make sure the money does not end up in corruption.
And please don't bring the Bekkevold name into the discussion. You should know why.
Blogmaster, I am not talking about the local church I attended but Brunstad itself, at least the conferences I went to, Horze was regularly mentioned by either K.S himself or other 'leading brothers'.
You say that K.S contributes the money his businesses generate towards the groups other churches, this is not my experience. In most cases, the local churches will have to secure the funding themselves and members are required to foot the bill, either by fund-raising, or mortgaging their house/property and personal contributions (separate to David's columns which are for Brunstad).
The fact is, in the last years under K.S leadership, finances has become the central most important emphasis in the group. Large parts of the meetings is spent in discussion of this.
I even remember my local church leader calling members who attended 'snakes' for not contributing enough. It's amazing just how far this group has left the core message of the gospel. It seems to be power, ambition and egotism that are of the utmost importance now.
Nevertheless, for me personally the worst aspect of this group was it's view towards other Christians. The claim that SF had exclusivity on the message of 'victory over sin' and 'christ manifest in flesh', whilst using this to label other Christians as false prophets. This is a lie and a lie that continues to be spread as 'the bride and the harlot' is still one of the most important literature in the eyes of SF members. (along with J.O's letters, Kaare's new books etc).
The fact that the group leaders and members are so insecure, that they need to convince themselves of just how great they are, by continually disparaging other Christians and claiming that the SF group is the only body of Christ is unfortunately a sign of cultism.
As for the Bekkevold saga, I think it further eludes to the true nature of K.S and the group itself and the rest of what happened during the 'revival period'.
I have no doubts that J.O Smith was a man of God and to some extent Bratlie too, but the judging of other Christians is not very Christ-like.
We were taught in SF that other Christians only preach forgiveness of sins and grace, after leaving SF and being exposed to other Christians, I can now say, that is one of the greatest lies that SF indoctrinates it's members with.
Blogmaster:
1. "That does not mean that everyone on board were terrorist".
Everyone in SF is not a terrorist and there are those who are good in every group, including Hindu and Buddhist cults. However, the point is that a type of "spiritual terrorists" run SF at the core so that everything is "controlled". That is why there is no "election" or "democracy" in SF, it is run as a theocracy. Everyone must obey and submit to the infallible leaders.
2.The Holy Spirit can be received both in SF and other churches, I don't become an Anti-Christ if I leave SF to join another church. (But, if I leave because I am offended that I did not become the leader, I might be an Anti-Christ, but then I would probably have been it for some time already.)
Thank God, you have some light for a moment. In the very next moment, you contradict yourself. What you mean is that if someone does not care for Brunstad's control and questions it and then leaves, he has left because he has been "offended" or "wanted to be great".
This is exactly what Brunstad attacked Zac Poonen with because he said "we have no Pope in Brunstad".
But you do have one, don't you?
In SF, "offended" is a catch-all phrase to describe a person who sees through the deception - whether in doctrine or behaviour - and voices this. So everyone who leaves can always be dubbed as "offended" and accused of "wanting to become great" or "of wanting to enjoy the evil world", etc etc.
3. Why cannot Olaf Bekkevold be mentioned? Because SF has condemned him and erased him? There is archival proof of how Kare Smith and others crowed over his being struck down "by God" by a stroke for being an "opposer". In Kare Smith's book Shepherd and Prophet, Bratlie's curse over Olaf is mentioned at a point where the conflict was strong. Here is the text:
"Olaf Bekkevold gave his farewell speech. He said he was not forsaking the church but he wanted to hold his own meetings. On the way down from the pulpit, Sigurd Bratlie commented from his chair: Yes, and THINGS WILL GO EVEN WORSE WITH YOU, brother!
This is the curse SF leaders put over anyone who disagrees and asks questions. This is practiced orally most of the time and through preached messages. But it is good Kare Smith put this down in the book for thus the "oral" tradition has become "written" and cannot be changed.
can someone update us about the
bekkevold incident
I rember hearing about him, but I
cant remember the particulars. BTW
blogmaster, Keith is the owner of this blog and he has set the ground
rules, we are now of course all
curious about what happened, and I
for one donot believe it is appro-
riate for you to tell us what to
contribute. I have been a charis-
matic christian for many years and
do believe it is possible to speak
curses over people. Shame on you
all for doing so, that is complete-
ly dispicable. Yes a curse without
a cause may not light, but how dare
you. I am sorry, a christian has
no business saying It will go bad
for you now. Jesus said bless, not
curse.
Blogmaster, as I stated a while back. You all do create the impre-
sion that any one who leaves is
anti christ, chanting if they were
of us they wouldn't have left. Ive
heard it with my own ears on more
than one occasion. Another BTW
I am still waiting for it to go bad
for me (Praise God)
"bekkevold incident..." We're obviously NOT supposed to talk about that. (Over 1100 comments later and NOW we're going to restrict what we say?)
8^)>
Russian: “Regarding Revelations. You may not understand the entire book or be able to relate how it is all related to our time... But you can at least say what you believe. I'm just asking about one part, the harlot that rides that back of the beast. You must have read what a Bibe scholar thought it was and said, "hey, that sounds about right."
I am sorry to disappoint you. I have read some things about this subject but I do not have a hard opinion on exactly what, or who, the harlot represents. It is clear from v17:18 that the angel describes her as “…the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.” And v5 identifies the title written on her head as “Babylon the Great the mother of prostitutes and of the abominations of the earth”
My study Bible says:
“According to some, it is used in Revelation for Rome as the center of opposition to God and his people. According to others, it represents the whole political and religious system of the world in general and the rule of the antichrist. According to others, it is to be understood as literal Babylon – rebuilt and restored.
Interestingly, I have read reports that Saddam Hussein has actually rebuilt the ancient city of Babylon in Iraq. For pictures go to http://architecture.about.com/od/themiddleeast/ig/Iraq-Photos/Marines-in-Babylon.htm
I also have a book by Tim Lahaye and he claims that it is necessary, in order for all prophesies to be fulfilled that the ancient city of Bablyon must be rebuilt.
Sigurd Bratlie on the other hand has a clear opinion on the harlot. According to him “The harlot is the result of Satan’s work among the people of God”. He relates her to “the Pharisees (the harlot of those days)”. And in the end he sums it all up when he talks about the ten virgins in Mat 25 and says “The five foolish virgins do not represent the world; neither do they represent the RELIGIOUS WORLD – THE HARLOT – because they are virgins.”
Clearly Sigurd Bratlie has just judged the whole of Christianity outside of Smith’s Friends.
So how does the harlot work according to Sigurd Bratlie. First of all, Satan organizes the church by electing elders, deacons, etc. “They are all chosen by majority vote, and it is precisely by using the majority that Satan gains his victory. The number of the beast is 666, which is two-thirds, and by this majority, the beast has instituted his laws and achieved his own will in every organization and group.”
Therefore, according to Bratlie, any organization that has a democratic process and majority voting scheme is controlled by satan. The logic of using the number 666 as a majority is laughable. Mathematically the number 666 is not a majority of anything by itself.
Russian (cont.)
Also according to Bratlie, “Commerce is one of the harlot’s methods of working.” He quotes Rev. 18:23 “…Your merchants were the great men of the earth.” And then says “Here the workers are described as merchants. This is the harlot’s way of spreading God’s kingdom on earth.”
John, El Fedro, Blogmaster, just exactly how many businesses does Kare Smith own?
So there are many different opinions on this subject, and again, I don’t have a hard opinion one way or the other but I certainly don’t subscribe to Bratlie’s interpretation.
It is clear that the antichrist will deceive many so it is important that we use our intellect, study the times (Luke 12:54-56), and not fall asleep like the five virgins (Mat 25:1-13). In order for us to do this we must think for ourselves, question our leaders, and hold them accountable for proper use of scripture.
And don’t get me wrong, there are many things that Bratlie points out that I agree with. Satan has deceived many, even in the church. He says “Satan has nothing against divisions and strife. Indeed, he has come to cause divisions…” I agree with this.
But then Bratlie justifies division by his interpretation of Luke 14:26-33 when he writes “Here we can see that being a disciple of Jesus is the same as dying. It means to forsake your family, your possessions, and your own life”. I don’t believe that it was the intention of Jesus to preach division within the body of Christ. Jesus and satan can’t preach the same message. There are too many scriptures that speak of unity such as Romans 12:18 “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.”
Aren’t you then doing satan’s work when you, as a believer in Christ, intentionally cause division within another Christian family by moving their daughter into your home? You can’t justify this unless you believe that you are the ONLY Christians.
All the SF people who have addressed this subject on this blog adamantly claim that SF does not preach this. But the behavior of this local SF group bears this out. It has been said again and again that you will be known by your fruit. What does your fruit say to us in Owasso? It is very clear.
John: You posted the communiqué sent from Brunstad and it included this statement. “The brunstad.org website editing team is working to develop a website where the gospel about freedom from sin can easily reach out to people who have a heavenly calling.” (Ref Oct 16)
So I have a couple of generic questions. How do you determine whether or not someone has a “heavenly calling”? Are we not all “called” by God? Doesn’t God want ALL of His creation to know Him? Or does this only apply to certain individuals, such as those who are “predestined” or just those that join SF?
El Fedro: I have a question about your statement concerning “a-lag” where SF members “…donate their time free of charge to work in the SF leader's businesses. Be it horse equipment, the building industry etc.”
It has become evident from statements on this blog that it is normal for SF members to donate some time at the Brunstad Conference Center. I believe this is, at the very least, a questionable church activity to use their members for what seems to be a profitable business venture (aka commerce?). OK, so they justify it by saying that the money raised is used for the church. But your implication is that these SF members are not just working for Brundstad but also used for the private business ventures of Kare Smith. Is this correct?
Also, along these thought lines, does Kare Smith own a construction company? And if so, does anyone know what company it was that had the contract to build the Brunstad facility?
Funnyman: “There is a big difference between someone acting foolishly and unwisely and the claim about a deliberate web of deceit.”
The Jonestown survivors tell how no one wanted to believe the truth about Jim Jones – until it was too late. Was he was acting foolishly and unwisely? or did he have a deliberate web of deceit? What about David Koresh or Rev. Sun Young Moon? It appears they were all being foolish and unwise AND spinning a web of deceit because it filled THEIR purpose, not for the purpose of God. They gained a following placing themselves directly BETWEEN God and man. Sin separates us from God. Jesus came to reconnect us to God. Not Jim Jones, David Koresh, Rev. Sun Young Moon, Sigurd Bratlie, JOSmith, Kares Smith or any other man. Only Jesus Christ came to be our propitiation for our sins and reconnect us to God. Only the name of Jesus Christ do we find in the Bible.
“I find it surprising that the SF (which includes my local church) is described as a cult where we are waiting for unsuspecting young people to fall into our lair, that we believe Bratlie and JO Smith are infallible, that we forbid people to marry, that we believe that Brunstad is the “new Jerusalem”, that we split families, that our leaders are ‘gods’etc. I could understand if this were just verbal rhetoric from someone who is hurt. But I cannot understand as to why one would try to pass it off as the objective truth. There are too many SF churches that do not conform to this view.”
“If one skims through from the start of the blog one will see that it initially began with search for what the SF was about and whether it was a cult. Travel forward now and we see that the question is answered many times over, people have taken sides on this question and many of the posts now reflect more a ridicule of the SF rather than a genuine search for truth.”
It MAY be true that SOME of the SF churches do not conform to this view. It also MAY be true that it does happen in many and you are just unaware. We know with all certainty that several SF groups definitely DO conform to these views. Otherwise there would not be so many testimonies from many different people in different parts of the world who have either experienced or witnessed these same behaviors and wrong teachings.
How does one form an accurate and well-informed response to a question? When investigating a crime, detectives will research, make inquiries and observations, collect data, etc. Obviously there continues to be division between this girl and her family which some have referred to as ‘spilled milk’; nonetheless ‘the milk has not yet been cleaned up’. As a parent myself, I’m pretty sure that the girl’s family and even her friends don’t see it just as ‘spilled milk’.
When one goes into a store and there is broken glass with a mess that has been spilled on the floor, it is expected that the store will place orange cones or some other barrier around the perimeter to alert patrons to stay out of the mess. You may see this blog as a place of ridicule, but I and others like me see it as a way to alert those who may unknowingly step into the ‘spilled milk’.
Due to many people posting, there are not only personal observations and testimonies, but also documented written quotes here that help answer the original question. Families HAVE BEEN split…this is not an imagined or isolated case within the SF nor
‘verbal rhetoric from someone who is hurt’. And, it has been documented many times over that this group ‘vehemently’ teaches Luke 14:26 deriving its ultimate goal….to split loved ones apart. There has been enough evidence on here to back up the belief that followers believe that Bratlie and JO Smith are infallible and that Brunstad is the ‘new Jerusalem’. This group IS isolated and reclusive, not interacting with other Christians outside of their own.
Early in 08 Keith and Harold both posted characteristics descriptive of cults which include:
-- “Participants are encouraged to either distance or cut themselves off from family and friends in an effort to control information/influence in their lives—even to the point of living in specific areas or communal situations.”
-- “The use of a coordinated program of persuasion. Cults tend to be totalistic, or all- encompassing, in controlling their members’ behavior and also ideologically totalistic, exhibiting zealotry and extremism in their worldview. Many cults put great pressure on new members to leave their families, friends, and jobs to become immersed in the group’s major purpose. This isolation tactic is one of the cult’s most common mechanisms of control and enforced dependency.”
*****What purpose did this girl living with this male teacher serve? What better way to keep her isolated from her own friends and family? And what better way than for this man to brainwash her; causing fear of family and friends and total dependence on this group. We know that SF places great emphasis on Luke 14:26. Why? Most church congregations focus on Christ’s love, mercy, grace, truth, healing, reconciliation, forgiveness, and compassion. They teach God’s forgiveness for those who accept Jesus as Lord and Savior and put their faith and trust in Him. True churches don’t proof text passages such as Luke 14:26 which results in separation of loved ones. This is a favorite tactic of cult groups.
--“Participants are not allowed to question the teaching or authority of the leaders.”
--“The power structure, or the relationship between the leader (or leaders) and the followers. Cults are authoritarian in structure. They appear to be innovative and exclusive. They tend to have a double set of ethics (David Koresh demanded sexual purity from his followers while he was having sex with all the females in the group).
--“The origin of the group and the role of the leader. Leaders are self-appointed, persuasive persons who claim to have a special mission in life or to have special knowledge. They are determined and domineering and are often described as charismatic and narcissistic.”
--“Participants are taught that any former “religious” instruction is wrong and must be abandoned. Only teaching from the leader(s) is correct.”
--“any system that insists on blindly following the teachings of an individual(s) regardless of how “unordinary” those teachings may seem.”
-- “Participants are kept in the group through coercion/mental control”
*****Anytime a person SUDDENLY changes everything in their life; all their own family, all their own friends, their own hobbies, their own career or school choices, their living arrangements (joining and moving in with their ‘new church’) and with whom they spend all their time, hating and fearing their own family….it is pretty evident that brainwashing/coercion/mental control has taken place. These things do NOT take place all at once without undue influence being placed on the individual….which is probably one reason why he wanted her living in his home.
-- “Participants are taught that they are THE ONLY true religion”
-- “As stated earlier, teaching that deviates from generally accepted Biblical theology (i.e. Jesus and Satan were brothers or Jesus married Mary Magdalene and they had a houseful of children, etc.)”
-- “Participants that leave the group are ex-communicated (whether they wear pants or not)”
Funnyman, “I search each post to see if there are any who have a desire to help the SF. I find very few. I instead find some who are willing to pull out all the stops in their effort against the SF using Owasso as an excuse.”
What do you think needs to be done in order to ‘help’ SF?
“I have not heard it as yet. I have only Keith and Harold’s. I have no reason to doubt them, but in every argument those involved are unconsciously unaware of their own mistakes and are very aware of the opponents.” (Oct 13)
You said, ‘in every argument those involved are unconsciously unaware of their own mistakes and are very aware of the opponents’. Most would probably agree with that statement. It has been documented that the girl’s family has made attempts at discussion with involved parties to no resolve. If this girl’s family has done something that they are ‘unconsciously unaware’ of and if this SF family is indeed wanting to behave in a Christ-honoring, Christ-like manner, they too would be attempting to clean up this ‘spilled milk’ so to speak.
Rssnspy6: “I believe that there will come a day when the peccability argument will be completely denounced by 'mainstream' Christianity. The Bible scholars will find some evidence that 'proves' Jesus was in fact God on earth.”
It doesn’t really matter what some Bible scholar says or doesn’t say. The fact remains that the Bible, God’s Word, should be proof enough that Jesus said, “I and the Father are One”. No, it doesn’t say ‘one and the same’. They are not the ‘same’. God the Father has no bodily form. But, Jesus does. He descended from heaven (God in the form of a human). God, the Father; God, the Son; God, the Holy Spirit all make up the Holy Trinity.
Form - one of the different modes of existence, action, or manifestation of a particular thing or substance.
Manifestation-to show plainly: make evident: display
Thank you Sophie for your comments. I will think about it and reply a little later.
John:
1. Can I take this as an admitting that your assumption that everyone that leaves SF is an Anti-Christ was wrong?
2. Please discuss what I write and not what you suppose I put behind the words. If anyone leaves any church because he is offended that he did not become the leader, he is not a good Christian.
3. If you knew the facts in this case, you would never had mentioned it. Please stop before any fool publish things none of us want posted here.
El Fedro:
You wrote: "You say that K.S contributes the money his businesses generate towards the groups other churches, this is not my experience."
Do you mean or do you not mean that K.S. uses the money to enrich himself?
And do you mean that collected money is used to pay the leadership in SF?
Harold: "Heavenly calling" is a term SF uses for those who are predestined to join SF and do so. That is the calling to be part of the SF which is the Bride and the ONLY CHURCH, Christ's ONLY BODY ON EARTH.
Blogmaster: Did you just say "any fool"? So if someone opens another "can of worms", is he that "any fool"? What was quoted here was what Kare Smith wrote of Sigurd Bratlie's curse on Bekkevold. Isn't in printed in black and white? Nobody has said anything beyond that.
Funnyman: "Unconsciously aware"???????
John:
If you knew the facts you would also call it foolish to publish them on this blog, and even if it is the truth it might also be illegal to publish it on this blog. In this case I totally agree with your statement "The objective of this blog is not to name people".
Blogmaster:
Why don't you just post "the facts" before "any fool" publishes some thing else?
Is that talk of "illegal" a threat?
Blogmaster:
"even if it is the truth, it might also be illegal to publish it on this blog"
Is it "illegal" to publish the truth?
John: Yes, in some cases it can be illegal to publish the truth.
One example: Many years ago I served in the Norwegian Special Operations Command unit. It would be illegal to post my experiences from this unit here on this blog, even if my stories were completely true.
Publishing the truth in this case would have given me major benefits in the discussion, but in respect for involved people I will not do that.
Blogmaster:
SF isn't Norwegian Special Ops. Why does it want to hide truth? Or is it that it has some skeletons in the closet that it doesn't want others to see? Is that why SF threatens people with legal suits and even physical violence like in Owasso? What does SF have to hide? Why does it fear other Christians?
Harold, that is indeed correct.
The A-lag (which means A-Team), is an activity that is heavily promoted to the youth within the group. It's promoted as something holy, selfless and spiritually enriching. The A-lag was created by Kaare as a vehicle for youth to show their dedication towards Brunstad and Smith's Friends.
Unfortunately, many of these youth are deceived. They work in Kaare's (Horze, building etc) and other leaders businesses, such as Gunnar Gangso (Finn-Tack) on the basis that they believe these businesses contribute 100% to the church. This of course is not true. If these myriad of businesses were to contribute to the church, why was there so much stress and requirement put on members to contribute funds? (including mortgaging of their properties to pay 'brunstad debt').
So these A-Team members would work in Horze shops free of charge (no benefits nothing), Finn-Tack distribution centers etc.
For those who claim that Kaare and other SF leaders live frugally is a disgrace, even Kaare Smith referring to exquisite alcoholic spirits said that he 'enjoys the fruits of the land'.
The SF leaders live an extremely 'well-off' lifestyle and of course with endless supply of free-labor, why not? Only sad part is all these duped youths who think that working in the leader's business is contributing to their spiritual life.
Blogmaster:
You claimed that the funds generated from the leader's businesses are contributed towards the building of the 'church'.
I say this is false and the proof is that the pressure put on member churches to generate funds, either through fundraising or contributing large amounts out of their own pocket.
I cannot recall any-time when Kaare has 'donated' funds to the churches without an onus to pay it back in full.
Most of the time however, it is the local church who takes out a loan and pressurizes it's members to pay it back.
John,
In regards to Bekkevold you are 100% correct.
In-fact SF leaders in churches all around the globe used what happened to Bekkevold as an example of 'how bad' it goes with those who oppose the church and how bad it will go with you if you leave the church. This was something that was constantly mentioned and gloated about.
Because he left the church and had his own meetings, instantly he was an opposer who was doomed.
The way the Bekkevold's and those who left with them were treated is just further sign of just how power hungry K.S is.
They view the revival as a cleansing out period, where all those who weren't true Christians left the church, but they fail to see how their actions were responsible for this.
El Fedro:
You wrote: "The SF leaders live an extremely 'well-off' lifestyle"
I am very glad I know these leaders personally. Reading speculations like this makes me sure that you never knew any of them.
John:
In this case the skeletons belongs to the people who left SF. But it is not our task to deal with them or publish them.
Blogmaster,
Classic retort. Very typical of SF'ers who cannot respond factually, so they dismiss the claims with simplistic responses like yours.
Maybe I didn't know them as well as you, I mean you must be some insider to have special permission to take part in this blog. I remember the directives issued by the leaders towards such discussions with 'unbelievers' and 'apostates' they were strictly forbidden.
Yes Kaare lives a humble and frugal lifestyle.... haha.
Nice real nice. Blogmaster, more
threats. Just lovely. Are you
a leading brother, or one that bears responsibility??? Just cur-
ious.
Nice real nice. Blogmaster, more
threats. Just lovely. Are you
a leading brother, or one that bears responsibility??? Just cur-
ious.
El Fedro: “I remember the directives issued by the leaders towards such discussions with 'unbelievers' and 'apostates' they were strictly forbidden.”
Did Jesus ever tell any of his apostles not to talk with unbelievers? Did he tell them to stay in the upper room and not speak to any unbelievers? No! He gave them the great commission. Go and tell the whole world what you have witnessed. Tell it in your own words.
John : “Unconsciously unaware” - What a person forgets and remembers are most often unconscious. One is more aware of the speck in one’s brother’s eye and unaware of the plank in one’s own. This is a natural thing to do and I would say unconscious. IT is not possible to consciously forget. I think only God can do that when He says He will remember our sins no more. One could of course try to consciously recollect memories. This is conscious. I hope I have clarified your question.
Blogmaster: You do owe us an explanation as to why any discussion is “illegal”, specifically the Bekkevold one.
Sophie : Your statement : “There has been enough evidence on here to back up the belief that followers believe that Bratlie and JO Smith are infallible and that Brunstad is the ‘new Jerusalem’”
I am puzzled as to what you would consider evidence on this blog that backs up the belief that Bratlie and JO Smith are infallible and that Brunstad is the “new Jerusalem”. I suspect that statements to this effect have been repeated so often that it feels as evidence. I would greatly appreciate it if you clarify this statement of yours as I feel that allegations about SF are repeated so often that they would pass of as facts.
El Fedro: Practically, how should I prove that the SF leaders don't live a life in luxery? Can you prove that you don't live that way?
As you posted the speculations without any proof, the burden of proof is on you.
Funnyman: As I believe you still attend SF meetings, you can ask your local leader if you want to know the details about this case. Then you will totally agree with me that is should not be posted on this blog.
Blogmaster.
You did bring up the term "illegal" which some have reacted to. This and your subsequent post suggests discussing this topic is contrary law.If you clarified what you mean by that term, without going into the details that would be good.
Funnyman: This is a very serious and tragic case. No newspaper in Norway has written about the case and at the same time named the people involved.
funnyman:
I am puzzled as to what you would consider evidence on this blog that backs up the belief that Bratlie and JO Smith are infallible and that Brunstad is the “new Jerusalem”.
-------------------------------------
The 'new jerusalem' is a common phrase used by SF leaders, it can also be found in SF literature. It is how they justify the followers to continue to contribute large amount of funds to continue building the 'new jerusalem' which will provide safety for them and their families in a very dark and evil world.
As for infallible, this can be deemed by the actions of the leaders. I remember Kaare at a brunstad conference saying quite clearly 'I am the one who built this church, I am the one who built Brunstad, what have you all done other then been doubters? who are you to question me?' in regards to some people who have doubted his actions.
It is very obvious that he doesn't welcome questioning of any sort and in his mind at least is infallible, none of the leadership or members would ever question prophet Kaare.
I even remember at one conference him telling everyone to 'put a v8 up their bum' in regards to raising more funds.
He does play the role of a dictator very well...
In regards to Bekkevold my point was merely how SF like to promote what goes bad with ex-members to their existing members. It is used to instill fear of what would happen to them if they were to leave the group. The Bekkevold saga is one that is often repeated by SF leadership.
Too bad they can't use Zac Poonen as an example, because after leaving SF his ministry has gone from strength to strength in India, to that end, they have even installed SF Indian attack dogs like John Oomen to tarnish his name. They took him to court over songs they alleged he stole and lost... it's amazing how they reveal they aren't really christians by ignoring the gospel, as Christians should not take other Christians infront of an earthly judge...
To this day, John Oomen and other SF leadership continue to mock and ridicule Zac Poonen infront of their congregation. The one that got away eh? Too bad blogmaster.
Zac Poonen was able to recognize the hallmarks of cultism in Bratlie's message early on.
El Fedro
I would like to share with you my
own experience of leaving SF. It
was one of the most terrifying
(emotionally) experiences I ever
had. I too sat in the meetings and
listened to how it would go bad if
you ever left SF. Then someone would begin to relay tales of ac-
cidental death, illness or horrible
life circumstances. I believed
since I left "the church" I was
doomed for hell.I figured even if
my body kept going to the meetings,
but I wasnt really along, I was
dooomed for hell any way. Even-
tually I came around and got plug-
ged back in to my old church be
fore I was in SF., Then I came to
realize that there are lots of
people who quit going to the meet-
ings and nothing bad happens.
I was only along for a few years
and I started when I was over 30
years old. I cant imagine the
trauma of leaving after being born
and raised in it let alone several
generations.
Blogmaster
I know you all think that you dont
openly promote that kind of think-
ing, but that is the impression
that is created
There are many many psychological victims of SF spiritual terrorism and isolation. How SF works with its preaching is that the "victim" is made to feel that he or she is really responsible for his or her own damnation. Subjectivity and negativity is pushed into the victim's mind via preaching that is individual and collective on the lines of "If you are not along, it will not go well with you."
Then examples of those who left SF and encountered some disease or disaster are circulated by word of mouth and often in the preaching to strengthen this fear. As said before, SF's favorite phrase is "fear of God" simply because few among them know the "love of God".
SF through its secrecy and hidden ways know that its victims are unable or unwilling to speak out because they have been isolated and no one is there to listen to them about their experiences in a group no one knows about.
Owasso, for instance, had no idea about this sect and the way it works till something "bad" was brought into Owasso life by SF.
Also, ex-victims want to repair their lives and live closely with God having escaped a group that tries to substitute and replace Jesus Christ the Lord with its leaders and the group itself.
Jarsmon,
Thank you for sharing your experience, in many ways my experiences and others that have left of whom I know was the same.
I still know many others who left and are worried about being 'saved', they still have second thoughts of returning because they're afraid that they have left the 'one true church' and 'body of christ'. That is how deep the indoctrination is.
It's not easy to leave and when I left it was a struggle, I received many accusatory letters from elder/leading brothers, warning me of the consequences of 'falling out of love with the brotherhood' and breaking apart from the 'body of christ'. These threats were all linked to passages of scripture.
I am so thankful that I was I finally awoke from my deep spiritual sleep and realized what a dangerous group I was part of. Constantly 'meetings' were concentrated on ridiculing other Christians. Common phrases like, 'they only preach forgiveness of sins', 'they only believe in grace and do not have victory over sin' etc.
It's like they had to justify their existence to the members every meeting.....
Since leaving, I truly believe I am part of the body of christ now, a unified body of all those who believe that Jesus Christ is their savior, not some elite group with a country club setting... I embrace all Christians now, not ridicule and bemoan them. How great it is to be free from this sect.
John,
It's been very reassuring to read your posts, because your experiences are identical to mine. Everything you have posted so far, has been 100% correct.
You are correct about victims being unable to speak out and as you say, this is associated with 'fear of god' which is used by SF leadership to coerce their members into acceptance.
'fear of god' is associated with questioning any aspect of SF, because SF in itself is the Church anointed by God to spread the true message to all nations of the world.
Often SF leadership will say that the reason God has not returned yet is because the true message of SF has not been preached to all nations of the world, this is used to encourage members to donate funds, so the missionary work can move forward.
Genuine Christians fall prey to SF and as you say, they want to live Godly lives that is why in most cases they fear sharing their experiences against the 'one true church'.
I am curious about the gentleman
that has been mentioned in previous
posts that left sf, that we are not
supposed to be talking about. What
exactly is we are not supposed to
know. My understanding is that he
started his own group but beyond
that I cant remember, was he killed
or die of some illness, or when they say it will go bad, does that
mean lifes circumstances got a lit-
tle rough, like they can for any
one, including any given sfer at
any given time.
Just curious.
Concerning what happened to the man Blogmaster does not want to be mentioned, who it seems from stories on the net and elsewhere was harassed and attacked and cursed by SF till he had a stroke:
http://griess.st1.at/kaarebok.htm
Google translator says:
"But (Kare) Smith is not ready to let the escapees (of 1991-92) in peace. He will strike again and again to emphasize how bad it Bekkevold, how bad were the Kristiansen family and others who were leaving. He beats and beats people lying prostrate as a result of his own behavior.
To the friends in Smith's Friends: Do you not see the hardness and revenge at Kåre Smith, if he hits people, and beating, (those who) languish already and have no way of defending themselves?
Can not you see the (delusions of)grandeur and thinking of himself, in the title of the book?
Can not you see that he lied in public, rough 100% lies? Can not you see that the book is a literary piece of work, jumping and self-contradictory, while the author glorifies himself? Do you not see the hardness and the ridicule against people in the spiritual field? The reality is in many ways the opposite of what Kåre Smith writes.
There were no bad people leaving the 1991 SF. Olaf Bekkevold und Erling Ekholt were not jealous of (Kare) Smith. After I have read Kåre Smith's book, I am inclined to believe the opposite, ie that (Kare) he was envious. It was not just doctrinal, which provoked the division 1991-92. It was the approach of Kåre Smith and his fighting cocks. This was ugly and rude.
It's pretty bad, and impossible to think Kåre Smith had had any respect for Sigurd Bratlie. Kåre Smith operates falsification of history. There were irrefutable and S. Aslaksen Bratlie, for the "legalism" in Smith's friends were responsible. All those who had not raised his arms to the sky (in SF), and asked that reason and intelligence be got rid of, can testify to that.
Kåre Smith is a coward? Look, who is mentioned in the book by name. They are the dead, the disabled, weak to stand up without the possibility to defend himself, why he did not dare to mention Svein Kristian Henriksen, Johan Velten and Alf Gjøsund too?"
Just to put in perspective what exists on the Internet that people on this blog have not seen.
Another place where one can hear a voice that is ex-SF.
http://griess.st1.at/fastgrun.htm
Use Google Translator to get the gist of it.
Thanks El Fedro. Amazing, just
amazing.
El Fedro, John and Jarsmom (and others too)
I too have heard about the Bekkevold incident and heard it used as an example of how bad it goes with those who leave the friends. You are correct in what you say. I disagree with this practice. As Christians we are not to gloat over a misfortune that overcomes one who disagrees with us.
Christians taking each other to court was brought up. In 1 Cor 6 : 5-7, Paul makes two interesting comments. He asks them if there was no wise ones among them who could judge. Secondly he coments (I think in the NKJV version) that it was already an “utter failure” that they went to court. I think these two points were made manifest. I recently heard that peace has been made between Zac and SF and was glad for that.
You are also right that it is very difficult to leave the SF. Those who leave, in addition to questioning their own worth have to almost build their lives all over again. It is like losing all your investments when your bank goes bust. One feels like one has to start all over again. What is also equally hard to bear is the fact that one may not be missed, and things seem to be going on with the same gusto with equal ease.
Relationships that were enjoyed for years can be broken overnight with the simple statement “ XYZ has left the church…!”. That you (El Fedro and Jarsmom ) can testify that you have been able to move on from the SF and enjoy true fellowship in other churches is something that gladdens me personally.
To be contd.
You may ask how I can ever claim to know what it feels like to leave SF? I have not left. But as the faults became more and more apparent, I have gone through the same feelings of seeing what I thought was something really good for what it actually is. I have friends who have left SF. I have seen people break relationships with them for no reason other than that they stopped coming on Sundays or they heard such a report. This just demonstrates that what is claimed as tremendous “brotherhood” and “love among the brothers” is in reality very fragile. Such conduct is un Christian and extremely immature.
An interesting verse comes to mind. Ezra 3:13,14. I would like to share this when you think things are hopeless for the SF. There are those who shout thinking everything is great, there are also those who weep over what it was and could have been. I think those who weep over this will one day be comforted.
It is unfortunate that when one leaves SF, SFers are unable to understand why and react with such indignation and contempt. I am sure that those who left would not have imagined that their “friends” would have reacted that way.
to be contd...
El Fedro : You are probably right when you say that few would question Kare Smith. However I do not think that is because they think he is infallible. They just may not be able to do it given their situations.
What is ironic is that I echo many of the sentiments that, Jarsmom ,El Fedro and to a certain extent John express. Although I do not agree with everything John says in certain matters he has hit the nail on the head.
I share this simple example to those who ask me why I post what I post and say what I say. Consider the SF to be like a large ship ferrying people. IT seems to have lost its course and sprung up serious leaks. IT is guilty of casting people into the water, some of whom could not swim. Some on the boat think they are the only ones who sail the seas. Some are blissfully unaware of the seriousness of the leaks and are playing the fiddle while the ship sinks. Now those aware on the SF have a choice. When it is obvious that the ship is going to sink beyond hope one will have to cry “abandon ship” and jump get out of there…as quickly as one can. Until then one can bail out the water, plug the leak and try to get others to do the same. Who knows? It may still float and limp its way home. 2Chr 36:15,16 comes to mind “until there was no remedy”. Our God is a God of compassion. I still think there is a remedy, so rather than condemn without a hope I would rather entreat that the SF sees the plank in its own eye. I do not encourage those who see the problems in the SF to leave. I encourage them to stay where they are and pray that God helps them touch others too.
Giving it to God did once ask something to the effect as to why God did not do something about this and perhaps judge the SF for what it was doing. Perhaps the answer lies in God’s answer to Abraham… there were ten righteous people out there.
Yes John, El Fedro and Jarsmom. I agree with many things of what you say.
to be contd...
El Fedro : You did make an initial statement that the SF has strayed from the path that JO Smith led it on. I think the initial path of the SF was devoid of money, power, etc and was more like a home church movement. There was so little organization, building Brunsatd was never an issue and there was true fellowhip. I have tasted such fellowship in the past where I was valued for who I was rather than my loyalty to Brunstad. True, it seems to have greatly strayed from the initial path.
For all.
When one looks at Rev 3 and 4 one sees the plight of the early churches. Many of them had serious faults and had a stern warning. I know SF local churches that
have serious problems. I would not call them non – Christians. I would call them tremendously foolish, who survive just because our Lord is merciful. I would not call them cults because my mental image of a cult is something different. Perhaps some on this blog may use the term cult more easily than I would, but the fact of the matter is that it is behavior we are talking about and as someone said earlier whatever you call it finally it is the behavior that is in question.
to be contd...
Sophie : What can we do to help the SF. I did think about it and am at a loss at present as to what to suggest to those who have been wronged by the SF and those who have moved on. I see what I have to do and what each SF member has to do. In a sense the help has to come from within the SF itself.
But all in this blog are helping already. Making everyone especially the SFers themselves aware of what is going on all over the global SF is a great help. However a small request to those who post : do try to be as factual as possible and back it up as best as you can. In the end we want people to accept their own mistakes. We want them to be aware of their own inadequacies rather than going on the defensive reacting to our tone, rather than our content. It is finally the Holy Spirit who will convict of all sin and not our literary abilities. Do continue posting. It will help.
However we will be judged individually for what we post/say. So I would like to entreat everyone (me included) to post with care and with love.
Let us speak the truth in love.
END
Blogmaster will protest and so too will Funnyman that this is all "old stuff" but good to remember the "old" with the "new" and realise that all change in SF is only "cosmetic" since those who control it are now media and image-savvy.
http://griess.st1.at/millard.htm
They keep erasing traces of stuff they believe in underneath .. the hatred of reason and intellect and study of Scriptures and context, etc.
How to be high-tech and SF:
http://blog.svconline.com/briefingroom/2009/08/18/full-medialon-control-at-dkm-forum-in-norway/
How to idolize and sell your "holy" icons the Brunstad way:
http://www.dkmforum.no/produkt_malerier.htm
More stuff on SF (translated) from http://www.daria.no/skole/?tekst=4108
Some sections are interesting:
Summary of an interview by Anita
"Anita is 30 years and resigned when she was only 15 years old. She was born into the church due. parents were members. Her great-grandfather Elias Aalaksen was with and helped Jo Smith with the founding of the church.
She says there are very few that arises (leaves) out of the church, and it is due to mix other things, that it is hard and tough. You get cast out of his own family and being completely expelled from the congregation. Right after she resigned, it was so tough for her she just as easily could die.
When she was 13 years old, she was deprived of all her pants and she had to go in a skirt. They had a ceremony where they burned all her pants on a fire. Now she was "sort of" grown up!
They believe the world outside is full of sinful people. Therefore, no kids (are allowed) with the other children are on. Precisely because they will not be tempted to do things that are not allowed. They (SF) therefore arrange their own tours and camps. When she was little, there were limitations. She was not allowed and drinking cola or chewing gum. Three years back, there was no law and enjoy alcohol, but the congregation was split in two into "Smith's Light" and "DKM". S. Light keeps the old rules, and is more extreme than DKM. Those who considers himself as DKM has law and drink alcohol as long as it is not full. They follow mostly the New Testament, while S. Light follows the Old Testament."
HELLO
Was reading this blog and when I saw what was preached just now at the brothers' meeting in Brunstad, wondering whether what is being said here about this being a sect orcult is true. An excerpt of what was preached by Kare Smith. The emphasis is on total submission to elders.
"There are young people growing up who believe in the doctrine, but they also believe that they know what is right – they have a self will... For example, you get a message to do something, but you don’t do it. Do you think it will go well, when it says, “Obey your leaders?” Correct your lives in accordance with that. How was it with Israel in the wilderness? They were rebellious. Rebellion leads to destruction – the earth swallowed them up."
I looked around and everywhere these people were hypotised by this message. I wondered, will they obey if their leaders told them to do something stupid and it seemed to me that they would do exactly that. I am worried for myself!
EXCERPT 1 - Kare Smith:
"Many brothers also have their interest in the earthly – they have been swallowed up. When their brothers who have shown themselves to be leaders for decades, when they give an exhortation, they say, maybe I’ll do that, or maybe I won’t. You are so far off, that you don’t understand that this will destroy your life. When people are faithful leaders, you must do what they say. Then you will get a reward for that in heaven. Some people say, “I’ll pray about it.” I’ve heard that so many times. How do you think it’s going to go with you...? I’ve worked with people all my life, and I’ve seen a lot of this. People are just stubborn. They don’t know what the spirit that is in the church is, and obedience (to earthly leaders) is more than sacrifice."
Kare Smith preaches to make people feel guilty and then his preaching thrives on their fears so that they have to OBEY the SF leaders or LEAVE THE CHURCH.
Excerpt 2: Is this definition of the Holy Spirit scriptural?
"The Holy Spirit is the man with the light."
Excerpt 3:
"...Have that attitude of heart that one is in the spirit of Christ, and that one works, that one has a true longing to help souls, and stands there where the wall is low, where Satan can easily come in, and prays to his God, so Satan can’t get in, and PEOPLE CANT GET OUT...Be satisfied with that. If you won’t do that, you should really be a member of a different church! This is the church of righteousness, where people do righteousness."
Jarsmom: I don't see any threat in my post, have no fear! I am not a leading brother in SF. Nobody has asked me to attend this discussion, nobody has told me to keep away from it. I am not an official spokesman for SF, everything posted here is my own opinions and thoughts.
The Truth: You wrote: "I wondered, will they obey if their leaders told them to do something stupid?"
Why not publish the entire speach of K.S. from yesterday as he answered this question too? He also spoke a lot about things that would clarify the speculations about infallable leaders. It would be a lot better to post the entire speech, not just fragments of it without the entire context.
To all:
This will be my final post on this blog. I might ask myself: Why did I attend this blog? Well, I guess the main reason was that the speculations were repeated so many times that they were considered as facts. But what mission did my effort do? I guess it would be easier to speak the supporters of the 9/11 conspiracy theory to reasoning than convincing people like John that Jesus had the possibility to sin without sinning. But there might be readers of this blog trying to sort out the truth, and I hope that I at least brought some balance into the discussion. For myself I also must admit that the discussion have not changed much (maybe excepts improving my written English). What I experience in my own life, what I read in my own Bible and what I see with my own eyes can not be changed by a blog posted on the internet.
Some of the posts here have put some labels on me and SF in general. For myself I really don't care of what is written about me, and you all have my complete forgiveness if you should feel any need for it. As I have the privilege to considers those labels as possibilities to find something in my own flesh to be cleansed from, I can in fact be thankful. However, what I care about is which labels God will put on me, and also, how do the people around me experience my life. Do they sense a selfish and arrogant man that is described here, or do they see the life of Jesus through my acts? Is there a judgement from my mouth, or is there a light shining from my life? Will my family, neighboors and co-workers be drawn to Christ by experiencing my daily life?
In the latest Brunstad Feast an old brother that once was a priest in the Dutch Church refered to the verse: "And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely." His experience was that everywhere he went he could here a "Come" from people's mouths, so also from the brothers of SF. The difference was that there also was a "Come" from their spirit. It does not matter how good I know the gospel if my life is preaching the wisdom of this world or even worse, the spirit of Anti-Christ. As I appearantly can't convince anyone here with words, the only way I can prove that a life in victory over sin is possible, is to live it.
The reason I leave this blog is that I don't want my involvment in this discussion to move the focus away from the process that has to take place in me to make progress in God. When I listen to the gospel or read the Bible it must be with focus on what it can do in my life, not how it can be used in these endless discussions. For other members of SF I will not give any recommendation about participating in this blog, as every Christian has the possibility to follow God's voice and plan individually for him or her.
A Norwegian preacher once stated to SF: "You seem to be true Christians in your hearts, but you are twisted in your heads". I can live with that description.
Blogmaster: “I hope that I at least brought some balance into the discussion. “
I believe you have. You have done a very good job of illustrating the attitude of the Brunstad leadership. Your lack of compassion for other people is very clear.
Blogmaster: “What I experience in my own life, what I read in my own Bible and what I see with my own eyes can not be changed by a blog posted on the internet.”
I agree with this statement. I hope that you also will understand that we, here in Owasso, have the same sentiments. It is the behavior here that defines your group. You can quote scripture all day long and your words can be right on target with Jesus Christ, but at the end of the day, when your behavior does not line up with your words, nobody will take you seriously.
Blogmaster: “Do they sense a selfish and arrogant man that is described here, or do they see the life of Jesus through my acts? Is there a judgement from my mouth, or is there a light shining from my life? Will my family, neighboors and co-workers be drawn to Christ by experiencing my daily life?”
Since nobody here knows you personally, nobody can validate your words according to your “daily life”, therefore you are known by the company you keep. If you are proud of the actions of your group, the hurt that seems to be inflicted to other Christians in the name of SF, then people will naturally associate you with them. That is obviously OK with you and I pray that God will have mercy on you in your hour of judgment.
Blogmaster: “As I appearantly can't convince anyone here with words, the only way I can prove that a life in victory over sin is possible, is to live it.”
The reason you can’t convince anyone here with words is that most people here have had their own experience with SF in one way or another and your words contradict so many other experiences around the world. Owasso is just one of them.
Blogmaster: "You seem to be true Christians in your hearts, but you are twisted in your heads".
I can say the same thing about the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas, or the people in Jonestown, or any number of different groups around the world who are following some self proclaimed prophet like Albert Tony Walker. Many of those people were truly committed to what they believed was a true prophet of God, and some still are.
To all: There are apparently a significant number of ex-SF people following this blog and I want to applaud your willingness to talk about your experience. I believe what you have experienced is a form of psychological trauma. People who have been victimized like this often have the feeling that they are the ones who are crazy. The world gets so mixed up and you lose your reference point for what is normal and what is not. It’s like a mental vertigo and you can’t figure out which way is up or down.
One of the best ways to find your reference points is to talk with other people. Counselors can be good but even some of them don’t understand. If this blog does nothing else but help some ex SF people find some connections and give them a place to voice their feelings and find out that they are not alone, that they are not the crazy ones, then this is a good thing. I encourage you to keep talking. It can help.
To use a favorite phrase of JO Smith's and leaders of SF - it looks like Blogmaster has "taken to his heels".
Guess the same goes for the Funnyman and RssanSpy.
still here
Funnyman: “I have seen what happens to the youth of today in my own city. I have seen them get into drugs, sex and alcohol. I have seen budding lives ruined. I personally think if a Church can offer activities for youth that can keep them from the world (in the actual sense of the word “world”) then it is good. However if such activites also causes them to disregard their families the whole aspect of church activities has to be relooked at. Such a relooking is possible even now in the SF. I am sure people reading this blog will hopefully be judging themselves about this”.
Yes, youth of today have many issues such as drugs, sex, and alcohol. And yes, many budding lives are ruined. However, I don’t believe that describes the young lady that is being discussed here. As has been reported, she is very intelligent and had very strong family relationships before becoming involved with SF. She was apparently on a path of independence and growing up, going to college on a full scholarship and so on. That doesn’t describe a young person who was ruining her life with drugs, sex, or alcohol. A church didn’t need to step in and keep her occupied in order for her to stay out of trouble. Now she never has time for her own friends and family? That is a direct result of twisted theology.
You also stated: “I would not call them cults because my mental image of a cult is something different.” (Oct 23)
So, what is your mental image of a cult?
John: "But (Kare) Smith is not ready to let the escapees (of 1991-92) in peace. He will strike again and again to emphasize how bad it Bekkevold, how bad were the Kristiansen family and others who were leaving. He beats and beats people lying prostrate as a result of his own behavior.
To the friends in Smith's Friends: Do you not see the hardness and revenge at Kåre Smith, if he hits people, and beating, (those who) languish already and have no way of defending themselves?
Has Kare Smith really hit and beat people? Did you mean that literally or figuratively? Physically or mentally? Please explain.
Thanks Sophie for your post.
The description of what can go wrong with the youth of today does not apply to the girl and was not my intention. Neither did the SF need to step in here. I do not think I have implied that.
Many of the statements I make are general and do not refer to the Owasso situation. I believe that the role of every fellowship is to be proactive in the life of the youth and not to be a just a passive observer.
Some recent events have take place that I have found to be interesting and thought I would share in this forum. The U.S. government last week carried out a sting operation that resulted in the arrest of over 300 members of a Mexican drug cartel operating in the U.S. One of those arrests was in Owasso.
I looked up some articles on this group and found that they were considered a “quasi-religious” group that calls themselves La Familia Michoacana. I know that this is not Smith’s Friends, but it just illustrates how far groups can take religion and twist it into something extremely anti-Christian.
This group claims to be devout evangelical Christians. A lot of the members are convicts who were “converted” to Christianity in Mexican prisons. These members are disciplined to abstain from narcotics themselves and care for their homes and children. They are also made to study a special Bible authored by the gang's spiritual leader Nazario Moreno.
This group uses the Internet to spread its gospel and on one online forum, hundreds of supporters sing the praises of Christ and La Familia. "Victory to La Familia Michoacana, glorifying Jesus by helping others". They also refer to their assassinations and beheadings as “divine justice”.
According to an online article from TIME magazine in July:
“Its use of extreme violence against rivals and police has given La Familia a brutal reputation across Mexico. The group first burst to fame in 2006 when gangsters severed the heads of five rival traffickers and rolled them onto a disco dance floor. The latest round of bloody mayhem kicked off on July 11, following the dawn arrest of alleged gang lieutenant Arnoldo Rueda from his family home. In an attempt to rescue him, gunmen besieged a police base for 20 minutes with grenades and automatic-rifle fire. When they couldn't break him free, they launched simultaneous attacks on police in towns and cities across Michoacan for the next three days. At least 16 officers were killed and dozens of police cars torched”
Again, I am not suggesting any connection between SF and this drug cartel or any other similarities other than the idea that there are countless groups not only today but throughout history that have used religion, including Christianity, to institute some fanatical form of divine justice on the rest of humanity.
If you have such disrespect and distain for all people outside your group that you consider them at the very least lost and not worthy of salvation, or at the very worst satanic, then it is not very far down the road that you justify killing them in order to preserve your self declared righteousness.
For instance, they don’t allow drugs or illicit sex among their own members and families, yet they grow and distribute drugs and prostitution for sale to the outsiders. The thought process is that those people are lost and going to hell anyway so they might as well make money off of them so that THEY can finance their own “righteous” life style. They can, as Kaare Smith said, enjoy the “fruits of the land”.
Sophie, your understanding of this girl here is right on track. You’re correct in saying that she is an intelligent young person and that she wasn’t ruining her life with drugs, sex, or alcohol (or anything else for that matter). There was no need for a church to step in and keep her occupied in order for her to stay out of trouble. You’re also correct in assuming that she ‘doesn’t have time’ for her own friends and family. In fact during the four weeks of her first Christmas break at college, she spent 1 hour on Christmas Eve with her family to exchange presents. The rest of the whole four week period she was at “church”. Most of the other holidays, birthdays, and vacations have been similar.
The interesting thing about this is how this is used to manipulate the image, and public perception of what is going on. If the girl is allowed to spend an hour at home during the holiday break then the family can not say that they NEVER see their daughter. That would be a lie. If they were to tell people that their daughter didn’t come home for Christmas then that wouldn’t be exactly true either. This in essence manipulates and controls what the family can say. The truth is that their daughter DIDN’T come home for Christmas. She didn’t come home with her dirty laundry. She wasn’t there when her family decorated the tree, baked Christmas cookies, shopped for gifts, or anything else that is a family tradition at Christmas. She wasn’t there on Christmas morning to open presents and she wasn’t there to eat Christmas meal with her brothers and parents. Where was she? She was at “church”.
More documentaries have been broadcast recently about cultic groups and practices while depicting the lives of Jeffrey Lundgren, Ira Einhorn, and Charles Manson. One of the common characteristics of each of these cases was that the followers moved in with their leader which gave the leader a form of control over their followers by isolating them from outsiders, gaining control over their environment, what materials they read, music they listened to, activities they were/weren’t involved in, and dominating most of their life and time with ‘Bible Studies’ and/or ‘other activities’.
Jeffrey Lundgren for example, ‘moved his followers into his home and every night subjected them to ‘intense mind-numbing Bible lessons’ in order to indoctrinate them’. He convinced them that he was a ‘prophet of God’ and that they should be obedient and submissive to him. Soon he even convinced his followers to call his wife and him ‘mom and dad’ and to hand their paychecks over to him.
Earlier in this blog, someone (I think Elf) said he didn’t believe this girl was brainwashed. But, after watching several televised documentaries on different cultic groups, and comparing this SF group with others, it becomes more and more apparent why this group, with its theology and behaviors, has been under scrutiny and questioning throughout the years. With this teacher moving this young girl into his home along with the sudden changes in her relationships, beliefs, interests, activities, etc. it’s evident that indoctrination/brainwashing must have been involved and taken place.
Brainwashing – a forcible attempt by indoctrination to induce someone to ‘give up’ his/her basic political, social, or religious beliefs and attitudes and to accept contrasting regimented ideas.
I have to compare this with what Sigurd Bratlie wrote.
“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.”
Harold: When you say she was ‘at church’, is it correct to assume this means this teacher’s home?
What purpose did living with him serve? Why did he feel the desire and need to have her live with him and his family? I believe the reason groups like this want to live together is obvious – it makes it easier to indoctrinate/brainwash the members.
“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.”
From the writings of SB books and also statements on this blog it is evident SF believes and teaches that the typical ‘mainstream Christian’ believes that because we have ‘grace’, in essence it gives us a license to continue sinning because we’re covered by the blood of Christ. They also believe and teach that ‘mainstream Christians aren’t really serious about our relationship with Christ, or abstinence of sinning, or being righteous.
My experience as a ‘mainstream’ Christian is that Jesus Christ, God manifest, perfect and holy, died as a sacrificial GIFT/offering for every man’s sins. We believe that accepting and putting our faith and trust in Jesus as our Lord and Savior and confessing our sins to Him, we are forgiven and saved by His mercy and His grace.
“On hearing this, Jesus said, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. But go and learn what this means;” ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners,” Matt.9:12-13.
“How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?” Heb.10:29
Because God knows our heart and our mind; He is aware if we are truly repentant when confess our sin or not. This is God’s judgment. Of course I can’t speak for everyone, but I believe that sincere Christians DO NOT believe that this GIFT of grace and mercy is a license to continue in sin. By God’s Holy Spirit, a believer will be convicted of his/her sin and that is between God and that believer. As a person becomes more convicted BY GOD, he/she will put off/do away with/repent those sins and in time, become more and more Christ-like as he/she matures and grows in God, His Word, and placing faith in Him. (Anyone can call him/herself a Christian so sometimes when someone, who doesn’t act like a Christian, says they are, they give all Christians a bad name. Others then tend to view all Christians as hypocrites.)
This is basically the basis for ‘mainstream’ Christianity’s foundational belief. Let’s take a look at SF belief. According to several writings, one ‘can become perfect according to my own conscience’. The conscience is defined as ‘my understanding of good and evil’. He further states that in order ‘to be perfect’ one needs to ‘put everything in my life in order according to the understanding I have’.
There are problems with this theology. The first problem is that it isn’t scriptural. The second is that if everyone has their own ‘understanding of good and evil’ then there is no absolute right or wrong. For people like Jeffrey Lundgren, Charles Manson, Ira Einhorn, Jeffrey Dahmer, Jim Jones, ‘their understanding’ obviously was that it was acceptable to murder people. Some people obviously believe it is right to rape, lie, threaten, manipulate, or steal from others. Some believe it is ok to intentionally divide friends and family members, and then use scripture out of context in order to justify it. Some have the understanding that it is ok to cheat. Some people believe it is ok to get drunk, commit adultery, and prostitute oneself. According to one’s conscience, these things may seem right, but according to God, they are all sins, which separate us from God. So, who gets to define what is good and evil?
Before Jeffrey Lundgren committed a very heinous act against some of his own followers, he stated ‘in order for Jesus to return, he needed to ‘as he judged it’- cleanse the vineyard’ which meant murdering people. Any time we ‘hear God speaking to me’, or ‘have our own understanding/judging’ about things and they don’t line up with scripture then we know it isn’t in accordance with God or His Will. God speaks to us through the Bible. God’s Word does NOT contradict itself. But, again we must know the correct context, historical settings, cultures, etc. in order to correctly understand it. We can’t just pick passages out, twist them, and use them to justify our actions.
The One True God is a God of absolutes. He is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. His laws/precepts/mandates don’t change. If one is truthful in claiming to be a Christian and claim that they worship the One True God, then it also should stand to reason that they would be interested in walking in obedience to Him, His laws and precepts, and living a life reflective of Him, ….loving others, showing compassion and mercy, forgiveness, patience, honoring your parents, honesty, loyalty, gentleness, kindness, self-control…”. It has been said before; you will know them by their fruits.”
Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” (Matt 5:17) We cannot live according to our own conscience…..some people have no conscience.
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.”
Matt 5:24, “leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.”
Some in SF would say that ‘mainstream’ Christianity uses grace as a license to continue in sin and then say something like, ‘I know Jesus died for me, so I can just do whatever I want because I know I’m covered by grace anyway’.
But one might say the same about this ‘conscience theory’ of SF. It is just a license to continue to sin because one could use this type of reasoning, ‘Well, according to MY conscience and MY understanding, it’s ok to lie, cheat, steal, kill, prostitute so I can continue doing these things. As long as it’s not hurting me, then it’s ok. According to MY conscience, I’m perfect.’ But, what does God say? At what point does God say we are perfect?
Jesus makes it very clear that there is only one way into heaven. With all the different ‘religions’ in order to be politically correct, many people will say there is more than one way in. That is also contrary to scripture. In Matt. 7:13-14 and John 10:1-18, Jesus refers to Himself as the narrow gate and the door (Jn10:9). He is the ONLY way to get into heaven.
From KS speech: "Many brothers also have their interest in the earthly – they have been swallowed up. When their brothers who have shown themselves to be leaders for decades, when they give an exhortation, they say, maybe I’ll do that, or maybe I won’t. You are so far off, that you don’t understand that this will destroy your life. When people are faithful leaders, you must do what they say. Then you will get a reward for that in heaven. Some people say, “I’ll pray about it.” I’ve heard that so many times. How do you think it’s going to go with you...? I’ve worked with people all my life, and I’ve seen a lot of this. People are just stubborn. They don’t know what the spirit that is in the church is, and obedience (to earthly leaders) is more than sacrifice."
One key characteristic of a cultic group is the exhortation/expectation/demand for obedience to the group’s leaders. No matter how long an earthly leader has held that position or how faithful he/she is, we are to obey God and His Biblical mandates. In this portion of his speech, KS uses forms of intimidation and manipulation which include scare tactics, criticism, and belittling. He also makes reference to a scriptural passage which can be found in 1 Samuel 15 in which Samuel is telling Saul (in response to his disobedience to God), “To obey is better than sacrifice.” Of course, this is referring to obedience to God, not earthly leaders.
Intimidation, belittling, criticism, condemnation, excessive and unsubstantiated fear causes insecurity, dependence, and feelings of entrapment within members. That is not of God. (Heb. 3:13, 1Thes.5:11, Phil.2:1-11) Jesus came to set captives (sinners) free. Not free to sin, but free to be who God created us to be, free to worship Him, free to love others, free to use the gifts God blessed us with, free to share our lives with others and free to spread the gospel of Christ.
Jarsmom: I would agree with you when you said, “This family, they feel, has lost their child.” My heart aches for all of them, but being a mother myself, I can especially empathize with the mother of this girl.
Oct 20: “Blogmaster, as I stated a while back. You all do create the impresion that any one who leaves is anti christ, chanting if they were of us they wouldn't have left. Ive heard it with my own ears on more than one occasion. Another BTW I am still waiting for it to go bad for me (Praise God)
Oct 22: “I am curious about the gentleman that has been mentioned in previous posts that left sf, that we are not supposed to be talking about. What exactly is we are not supposed to know. My understanding is that he started his own group but beyond that I cant remember, was he killed or die of some illness, or when they say it will go bad, does that mean lifes circumstances got a little rough, like they can for anyone, including any given sfer at any given time.”
That’s an interesting point that you brought up about ‘life’s circumstances getting a little rough like they can for anyone, including any SFer at any given time’. We live in a fallen world where ‘bad things happen’ – death, infidelity of spouse, murders, job losses, car wrecks, drug, alcohol, pornography and other addictions, rapes, thefts, threats, etc. These things were brought into the world by satan and are used to pull us away and distract us from God.
For SF or any other group to make statements such as ‘Things will go bad with you if you leave our group’, is a form of manipulation by intimidation and fear. Things will at some time or other ‘go bad’ with everyone because we ALL live in a fallen world which is why Jesus died.
I wonder what happened to John, atanomellon, truth and El Fedro and why they haven’t posted in a while. Do you think things have ‘gone bad for him’ because he was speaking against SF?
I know Blogmaster said that was his last post, but I do believe it would be beneficial if he would share with the readers of this blog which ‘speculations’ he’s referring to that aren’t facts? Didn’t he say that he resides in Norway? So, how does he KNOW that the things discussed here are only ‘speculations’ and not facts?
Maybe the reason that these ‘speculations’ have been ‘repeated so many times’ is that they ARE FACTS that have been WITNESSED by so many different people (SF members, ex SF members, and non SF members) in many different locations.
That is a very interesting statement considering the fact that many people have witnessed members of this group lying, cursing, threatening, intentionally causing fear of loved ones, intimidation, and division between friends and family members, and being hypocritical. How can any of those characteristics be considered ‘righteous’?
Sophie:
"1 Samuel 15 “To obey is better than sacrifice.” Of course, this is referring to obedience to God, not earthly leaders. Intimidation, belittling, criticism, condemnation, excessive and unsubstantiated fear causes insecurity, dependence, and feelings of entrapment within members. That is not of God."
Sophie - you are right on. I would like to add "abandonment" to the list above. SF "isolates" people from society deep inside the psyche and physically and then if anyone "doubts", they face ostracism and finally they are abandoned. It is a terrible experience from what we have seen.
Here is the story of one such person who was "abandoned" in India by SF and is terribly wounded and alone but he "survives" on the true faith in Jesus the compassionate one:
X was a pastor in a Pentecostal assembly in a hilly estate region in Tamilnadu-Kerala border. He was blessed as one who could bring many to Christ. He stumbled upon a meeting advertised by SF leaders. On the first day there were some 100 listeners and as SF preached its "gospel", the numbers dwindled over the next two days to five or six. Pastor X got "gripped" by the SF "gospel". He was in his mid thirties and single. Once gripped, he became indoctrinated and "zealous". He was instrumental in bringing several families, uprooting them from "harlot" denominations, into SF India. His faith was simple and the "zeal" drove him to hate other Christians and also to "save" them and bring them into the TRUE AND ONLY CHURCH.
(contd)
Post a Comment