Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
December 11, 2017, 08:21:30 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: the "Hate Me" phenomena  (Read 10290 times)
EverAStudent
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 716



WWW
« Reply #20 on: May 13, 2011, 09:10:42 pm »

Beleive it or don't, but I am still on dial-up, so it may be some time before I can watch the video on the link you posted (waiting for video to load over dial-up just does not make sense).  Perhaps you could distill and post the salient points?  Smiley

Personally, I rarely use the term dispensation to describe my theology or myself.  Oh, there are dispensations to be sure, as I have already said, but the extra baggage that comes with the word make it too tedious to use. 

Hey, did we hijack this thread?Huh?  Sorry all.
Logged
Innerlight
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136



« Reply #21 on: May 14, 2011, 08:46:27 am »

You have to watch the news story to get the "kookiness" of the whole event, you could still read th article attached:  Here is a summary, not in my own hand, but from Ben Witherington's Blog:

The Peacemaker as the Anti-Christ?
Below you will find a link to a brief video made by a Jewish young man named Mr. Max Blumenthal. He decided to visit the recent CUFI (Christians United for Israel) meeting led by Rev. Hagee and his friends. There are many things that are chilling about this video but here are my top five:

1) the Anti-Christ will be a person who will seek to make peace between the Arabs/Palestinians and the Jews

2) Armaggedon is something to look forward to, when we will have 'the cleansing of the earth'.

3) U.S. support for Israel should be unconditional, regardless of how they treat Palestinian Christians

4) If we want to participate in the second coming of Jesus, then we have to unconditionally support Israel from now until then, regardless of their policies or behaviors, otherwise we miss out on the parousia blessing.

5) It's a Biblical idea to have a pre-emptive strike on Iran before they cause more trouble for Israel.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/rapture-ready-the-unauth_b_57826.html


Oh yes, there was also the tidbit about Hagee's multi-million dollar salary, ranch etc. So much for following the examples of the early church as described in Acts 2-6, who forsook all self-centered self-indulgent, self-aggrandizing behavior.


It seems that Rev. Hagee has given up on the beatitudes of Jesus, which among other things blesses the peacemakers and the poor. Indeed, it seems Rev. Hagee has managed to give up on the sovereignty of God as well since the NT is perfectly clear that 'vengeance is mine, I will repay' says the Lord. The NT is emphatic about Christians leaving issues of final justice in the Middle East and elsewhere in the hands of God, and not taking up weapons to try and exact some poor flawed human vision of justice. No one is worthy to unseal the seals of the wrath of God on human wickedness except Jesus himself, according to the book of Revelation. No One. Not the U. S. , not Israel-- no one. We have no more to do with Armageddon than the Israelites had to do with causing the original plagues on Egypt. Indeed Armageddon is according to Rev. 20-21 the day when Jesus simply calls down fire from heaven on the ungodly. There will be no final battle, simply a word of judgment by the Lord and then the end. And none of the events in the Middle East right now have anything to do with Armageddon. That's all in God's hands, not ours.

What is perhaps most disturbing about this video is not how many Christians have bought this horribly distorted view of the Gospel and the future, and fervently believe it too, but how very clear it is that the mixing together of bad theology with bad politics results in a Devil's brew which makes the Gospel say just the opposite of what it says.

Christians, are called, here and everywhere to be followers of the example of the prince of peace, and to be peacemakers. If they wish to be vocal supporters of any persecuted group, it should be their fellow Christians including Palestinian Christians in the first place and others thereafter.

Even more disturbing is the schitzophrenia of affirming the Gospel of peace for one's personal life and spiritual development, and longing for peace for oneself, whilst support the politics of destruction, bombing, and general mayhem in the Middle East. Jesus said "inasmuch as you have done it unto the least of these, you have done it unto me." Perhaps, you will remember how Saul was confronted on Damascus road about his persecution of Christians. Jesus' words are chilling "Why are you persecuting me?" Well frankly, this is precisely what Jesus is asking Rev. Hagee right now because of his support of the destruction of the homes, families, and lands of Palestinian Christians by means of Israeli policy.

We should all be praying for the peace of Jerusalem, as Jesus himself did. And we should do all we can to support the recent efforts to bring peace between President Abbas and the non-Hamas Palestinians and Israel, so Jews and Christians and Moslems can live in some sort of uneasy peace in the Holy Land until the Lord returns, whenever that may be. It will not be politics at all that sorts things out in the Middle East-- it will only be the return of Christ. Short of that we are called upon to pray for and work for peace in that region.
Since the rapture is not a Biblical doctrine at all but rather something dreamed up by a teenage girl in about 1820 at a revival in Glasgow Scotland and then preached by Darby and Moody neither of whom were ever Bible experts, perhaps we had better pay attention and see what a proper Christian response should be to this crisis, especially for the sake of being a good witness.
The Left Behind Series, 'Kingdom Come' and Joel Rosenberg's 'Epicenter'-- There they were on Glenn Beck on CNN (who appears to be a true believer in Dispensational sensationalism) regaling us once more with there false predictions about the end of the world-- I mean LaHaye, Jenkins, and Rosenberg.

We were told that the rapture is surely coming within the next 25-50 years. Of course we were told this by Scofield a hundred years ago, and Chafer 75 years ago , and Lindsey over 50 years ago, and they were all dead wrong. In fact, in all of church history whenever anyone has predicted the timing of the return of Christ they have all shared one thing in common--- they've all been dead wrong! There's been a 100% failure rate of such false prophecies. There is no reason to think these aren't just more false prophecies. They don't even pause to ask-- Has the the Gospel been preached yet to all the language groups in the world? Well no, there are still about 500 such languages and dialects to go before we get there, and Mark told us that had to happen first in Mk. 13.

Jerry Jenkins on the show at least had the good sense not to engage in this sort of theological weather forecasting in regard to specifics. I wish his partners in crime had been as reticent.

When the expectation of the return of Christ, which is shared by all denominations, degenerates into prognostication and calculation, [despite Mk. 13.32 which tells us that the time and timing of this event is completely unknown, and was even unknown to Jesus himself whilst on earth (and no it does not mean "we can know the general year or decade, just not the day or hour")], then we have ceased to move on faith, and are engaging in human manipulation.

Why do I say this? For the very good reason that when you look at the definition of faith in Heb. 11.1 it says "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, and the conviction about things not seen" (indeed not visible). But all these supposed signs that LaHaye and company think they can read are all too visible historical events. But there will be no such earthly signs before the return of Christ, only cosmic ones that accompany that return if you read Mk. 13 carefully. Those earthly signs in Mk. 13 preceded the fall of the Temple in A.D. 70. They won't be coming around again, in Mark's view.

So its time to leave behind the Left Behind false prophecy once and for all. Those folks don't even understand either the character or the significance of apocalyptic literature, nor how to interpret it (for more on this see my Jesus the Seer, or my Revelation commentary).
Logged
MidnightRider
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 290



« Reply #22 on: June 04, 2011, 11:24:32 am »

The eschatology part of this discussion moved to
http://forum.gcmwarning.com/the-moribund-equine/of-that-day-and-hour-no-one-knows/
Logged
Ned_Flanders
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Online Online

Posts: 103



« Reply #23 on: August 31, 2012, 11:31:15 am »

Hi,
I know these threads are old but I just wanted to reply. 

I left GC in 1994.  I've told some people since then that I used to be part of a Church where people didn't date each other.  Their response is always, "Then how did people get married?"  And honestly, I'm very selective in who I tell the whole "no dating" story to because it's really embarrassing. 

When I started going to GC in 1986, I was very excited.  I found a Church with a lot of young people to hang out with and have fun with.  And I was also thinking that this might be the place I would finally meet a girl and start dating. 

I had never dated before joining GC.  I suspect that is true of many people who were involved there, including those who now loo back and wonder "what the F was I thinking" getting involved in a place that told me I can't date?  To me, dating was asking a girl out to a movie, or to a restaurant, or to hang out at the mall or something.  But for some other people, dating means sex.  Looking back, I think many in the Church establishment (i.e. those on the front line of the no-dating creed) were people who, before they came to the Church, F-ed up (literally).  They slept with everything; then they came to Christ
but, unfortunately, legalism as well.  They didn't date because they knew if they did, they would be out humping like a dog. 

I think there is some truth to this.  I became good friends with a guy who, albeit nicely, let me have it for simply saying "Wow, she's very attractive" about a woman I saw at a bus stop while he and I were driving down the street.  He immediately opened his Bible up to Proverbs 5 and 6 about the whole "don't look at a woman with lust" thing.  Anyway, several years later he got married and years after that, I learned he had multiple affairs on his wife- even in the first year of their marriage.  He was truly a sex addict.  I knew he had struggles but so did I and I never thought it was anything beyond lust.  I really believe he was living a double life: leadership in the Church; while hiding his sexual activity. 
Logged
2xA Ron
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 76



« Reply #24 on: September 11, 2012, 02:40:37 pm »

No dating was huge in the college group I went to.  It was taken further, of course, to the point of it being a sin to talk to girls (except if you were in a group setting talking to several girls at once and obviously liked none of them, apparently that's fine).  I remember even being forbidden from sharing the gospel with an unbelieving girl because...well, she was a girl and I was a guy.  When I did start liking a girl, I was repeatedly told I had to stop interacting with her completely.  When I wouldn't listen, they went to the girl and convinced her to give me the cold shoulder instead.  It's amazing how they can get you to think that all of this "hate me" stuff is somehow in love.  I had people my age who'd never been in a relationship telling me what was best for the long-term happiness of a girl and a relationship.  The irony was that I knew women better than any of these guys since I had two sisters, some good non-GC female friends, and studied gender differences and psychology as a hobby--and yet it was still really hard for me to dismiss their arguments at times.
Logged
Ned_Flanders
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Online Online

Posts: 103



« Reply #25 on: November 12, 2013, 11:09:53 am »

Did you know that whole thing about Men think about sex a certain number of times every few minutes/seconds whatever has been recently found to be completely misleading?  First, they found they really didn't think about sex any more than they did about food and sleeping.  How funny is that?  Are they going to make people start confessing that they watched the food network? 

Honestly, the more you think and talk about these things publicly and in detail, I see two things inevitably occuring, 1.  You will be tempted way more than ever or 2.  You might develop a dysfunctional relationship with sex because behaviorally speaking, it is always "paired" with an aversive.  Therefore, you might start taking that "aversive" feeling of shame with you into a healthy marriage. 

That's not right for people to do that to you.  It is abuse, plain and simple... there is no other way around it.  And this is true if it is in a cult, an Orthodox church, a Catholic church, and Episcopal church, with your parents, or with a weird friend.  No one has this right to have this kind of control over you.


I feel sad for the men who are made to feel like dirty, perverted animals for something that is a normal part of human behavior.  Seriously.  We are programmed to reproduce!  That was what God even said in the Garden of Eden.  GC is so weird.

Thanks for sharing this, especially the last part (in bold).  Not trying to sanction pornography here (and good luck defining exactly what that is) but it's always been women I've known who have had a more liberal attitude about it.  I dated a girl who said she felt the Playboy-type stuff was like "art" to her.  In other words, she saw women's bodies as beautiful and, if tastefully done, could be appreciated as such.

On the other hand, one time I was riding in a car with a GCx brother and I saw a girl at a bus stop.  "Wow, she's really cute!" was all I said.  He immediately threw open his Bible to Proverbs 5 and 6 and gave me the whole "Do not look upon a woman with lust" thing.  Looking back, I don't think that was lust.  It's not like I said, "Hey man, check out the _______ on her!  And she sure knows how to work that __________!"
Logged
theresearchpersona
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418



« Reply #26 on: February 03, 2016, 03:23:42 am »

x*D

So interesting. I come visit and see this thing grew out for two years.

Just to exapand:

In my case I was told to be "intentional" by the "brother" I went to for counsel, but given the contradictory message about what is/isn't godly and serving God, praying, and trusting in Him, constantly encouraged in this further...

Well I neither dated or married, didn't get a degree, got sick and nobody came, wound-up basically homeless a while...

O, last I heard from that gal was the need for men to be intentional. lol  Was kind of a b*t**y thing to say given I once sat next to that person at a Swerver session...makes it even funnier really, since I'd behaved and acted "the GC* way" which should have very much shown intentions according to [the whole environment].

Flame sparked (I hope). Fire on? Wink
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1