Don't Be Afraid of Them

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.

[Janet Easson Martin]

DON'T BE AFRAID OF THEM!

This is dedicated especially to Suzanne, Victim C, and Victim A; and to any others who were sexually exploited or assaulted by the pastor-in-question.  

After I left, when I first started to process the heavy burden and continual shaming of GCx's people, I happened to mention it to someone who was still in the church and expected them to agree with me.  Instead, they said I was just "bitter".  I was taken aback and questioned my own conclusions because it was someone I had respected. (Of course, I also got the phone calls that I did the wrong thing by leaving.)  BUT, I had to consider the source. These were people who chose loyalty to GCx above all else.  Why should I expect them to say anything different?  It was a good opportunity to have my own thoughts and opinions and trust my gut, which I had stopped doing while under GCx's influence.

As God's Holy Spirit led me to SPEAK UP in the winter of 2010, He kept showing me over and over to expose the spiritual abuse that I had seen, and experienced.  His continual nudging led me to ask him how and where. Within a few days I found this website.  As I started speaking up on here, he would support my actions in His Word with confirmation and encouragement.  He even told me NOT to be afraid of the leaders of GCx (even though they had created such a tall stature in my mind).  He told me to speak up for those confused and frustrated believers who were used and abused by them; and for those still captive to GCx's berating dogma. Here is the verse he spoke to me through:

"Don't be afraid of them.  Remember the Lord, who is great and awesome, and fight for your brothers, your sons and your daughters, your wives and your homes."

[Huldah]

Thank you, Janet. I found this post comforting even though it wasn't addressed to me.

[Janet Easson Martin]

That verse popped out to get my attention one morning when God was speaking to me about posting on here. Standing up for myself and others.  It was a clear summons to be bold and not hold back.  

The control wielded over us under the passed down 'teachings of Jim McCotter' was NOT of God.  It was very harmful.  I was empowered by these and other scriptures to speak out.  Here is another passage that I felt God was commisssioning those spiritually abused in GCx to speak out.  It's not too late.  It seems there are more people now then ever before.  

Suzanne' post has been viewed on 25,000 different devices (I estimate on the low side - 12,500 different people!) in less than 3 months.  Victims have a prime opportunity to voice the abuse they experienced. Members or former members can tell sincerely how they were manipulated, belittled, and even shunned by the practices of their GCx church.  They will be heard here and supported.  (Don't be afraid of those who accuse you of making it up.  God is on the side of the truth.). Somehow, speaking out helps us better process what was done to us.  

"And let the peoples gain new strength;
Let them come forward, then let them speak"

Isaiah 41:1 (NASB)

I believe God is calling those who were silent victims of spiritual abuse inside the organization of GCx to come forward and speak.  One of the main controls of spiritual abuse is manipulating its people to be silent and never question their "authority" of wrong doing.  Accusing them that in doing so, one would be in "rebellion to God".  If what we are testifying to is true, that is NOT what God says.  He says EXPOSE them because they have not repented though MANY have tried to approach them in the order of Matthew 18.  These leaders then come under the category of refusing to listen and repent and so can be reported to the CHURCH!

According to the scripture Isaiah 41:1, the instruction seeks to empower and strengthen those who have been harassed and beat down.  It offers opportunity to do what we have insidiously been told is sin - to voice the destructive wrongs done to us.

You are God's people.  He does listen to you.  I believe he initiated this wonderful website and deems it necessary to bring us together to listen to each others testimony to find out we are not alone, to VALIDATE THE SPIRITUAL ABUSE which we have been so falsely told 'is not valid', and to finally have a safe place to speak out and warn others.

If you feel God is calling you to come forward, though we recommend anonymously, speak here and be strengthened as God has said.  

[Free now]

Thank you, Janet. This is really good and true. Here is what comes to mind after reading your post:

While it's good to appreciate how a person has helped or influenced you, when I hear phrases like #markdarlingismyhero and the Mark Darling Fan Club, there's something unhealthy about that.

When people are surprised/dismayed because of the sin (or the "sin") of others, or when they're let down because someone who'd been an "example" now disappoints, there's something shaming about that.

When I hear the phrase "our movement," there's something exclusive about that.

No one deserves our worship but Jesus. It's His fan club, His example, His movement...His Church.

John 5:44, Psalm 130:3-4, Matthew 16:18, 1 Corinthians 12:4-6, Isaiah 42:8

[jeromydaviddarling]

Folks, why do you talk about me as if I'm not reading this stuff? It's incredibly offensive

1. Since I was a web designer for 15 years I guess I have to break the bad news to you: 90% of the traffic to this site is from spam bots. It's not ACTUALLY 25,000 people viewing this site. It's a bunch of spam bots and spiders from (mostly) Russia and other nefarious countries.

2. But for the sake of the argument, lets say it WAS 12,500 people that read Suzanne's story. You realize that only about FIVE people have created new accounts to come on here and voice their support for Suzanne right? That would be humiliating for you all if you'd actually do the math

3. I can't believe I have to come on here and explain what "tongue in cheek" means, but I didn't literally MEAN the "Mark Darling Fan Club". It was a clever way of expressing that for every ONE person that hates my father there are about one THOUSAND that love him and credit him with their salvation and success as Christians. Which would mean something in most circles, but apparently not on this forum. Just use the search on this site and see how many positive threads there are about my dad. Zero, right?

[Free now]

Folks, why do you talk about me as if I'm not reading this stuff? It's incredibly offensive

1. Since I was a web designer for 15 years I guess I have to break the bad news to you: 90% of the traffic to this site is from spam bots. It's not ACTUALLY 25,000 people viewing this site. It's a bunch of spam bots and spiders from (mostly) Russia and other nefarious countries.

2. But for the sake of the argument, lets say it WAS 12,500 people that read Suzanne's story. You realize that only about FIVE people have created new accounts to come on here and voice their support for Suzanne right? That would be humiliating for you all if you'd actually do the math

3. I can't believe I have to come on here and explain what "tongue in cheek" means, but I didn't literally MEAN the "Mark Darling Fan Club". It was a clever way of expressing that for every ONE person that hates my father there are about one THOUSAND that love him and credit him with their salvation and success as Christians. Which would mean something in most circles, but apparently not on this forum. Just use the search on this site and see how many positive threads there are about my dad. Zero, right?

My point exactly. No one is denying the positive influence of your dad in many lives, mine included. But to “credit him with their salvation and success as Christians” is wrong.

Salvation is from the Lord alone.

I didn’t really, truly get that when I was at ECC. Part of that’s on me — I didn’t read the Word for myself then.

[jeromydaviddarling]

I guess I have to break this back down into milk for you:

Romans 10:14
"14 But how shall they ask him to save them unless they believe in him? And how can they believe in him if they have never heard about him? And how can they hear about him unless someone tells them? 15 And how will anyone go and tell them unless someone sends him? That is what the Scriptures are talking about when they say, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the Gospel of peace with God and bring glad tidings of good things.” In other words, how welcome are those who come preaching God’s Good News!"

CLEARLY I wasn't saying my dad is their SAVIOR. Millions would credit Billy Graham as the one that brought them the Good News, as a few thousand would credit my father as the one that pointed the way.

[Free now]

That’s a good word, Jeromy. The condescension I could’ve done without. Again - believe it or not, I care about your dad, too. God bless you and your family through this painful time.

[jeromydaviddarling]

Then stop posting stuff like this. 95% of the times I post on this website, no one bothers responding to anything I actually say. I may not be anything like the Apostle Paul but I've worked VERY hard to speak as he spoke and deal with this utter madness as rightly as I possibly can.

[Differentstrokes]

Excellent post Janet, thank you ❤

[Mary7]

Janet, thankful for the wisdom you shared yesterday.

Being stripped of reputation, position, status and pride is one of the best things that can happen to any of us. Painful for a time, but God will not share His throne.

I am the LORD; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols. Isaiah 42:8

True FREEDOM comes from knowing that Christ holds all I need and is all I need. He has shown me that I no longer need to impress the pastors, their families, or work myself up the through the system. God's standards are so much higher than man's (GC churches OR ANY OTHER idol) but so much easier since He holds the weight.

My soul finds rest in God alone, my salvation comes from him. Psalm 62:1

[GodisFaithful]

Thank you, Janet.

When we were in a GC church, I  cowered in fear of what the pastors might think if they realized we were questioning some of the teaching.  Going before them was like walking on egg shells. 

Jesus made it clear that spiritual leadership is not "Lording It Over" like in the world system. 

In the church, leadership is meant to be servant leadership.  We are a body. The little toe as important as the liver.  Christ being the Head.

I am pretty much a little toe. 

The ground is level at the foot of the cross. 

Jesus is the example of servant leadership.  "He took a towel..."

[LuisCamachoIII]

Jesus made it clear that spiritual leadership is not "Lording It Over" like in the world system. 

In the church, leadership is meant to be servant leadership.  We are a body. The little toe as important as the liver.  Christ being the Head.

I am pretty much a little toe. 

The ground is level at the foot of the cross. 

Jesus is the example of servant leadership.  "He took a towel..."

I agree 100%! Beautifully said

When we were in a GC church, I  cowered in fear of what the pastors might think if they realized we were questioning some of the teaching.  Going before them was like walking on egg shells.

I'm sorry that was your experience. I'm not questioning your feelings or your story.

I can only add that that has not been my experience at all. I've been at Evergreen since 2007 and have always considered myself to be a respectful "questioner", even to this day! There were some GC principles that I had strong disagreement with when I joined (alcohol, the sabbath, committing to your church for life, etc...) and I brought them all up. There continue to be some principles that I question even now (the role of spiritual gifts, the tithe, what the headship of the father means, etc...) and I occasionally bring them up as it fits the occasion. My aim is always to bring it up with utmost respect, and I think I usually do . I've always felt the pastors to be approachable and open to discussion.

Bonus: Last year (or maybe 2 years ago) I brought up my feelings on the tithe to an Evergreen pastor. After I was done stating my case, he said he strongly disagreed. He even, at one point, said the words "I think you're totally wrong." I wasn't offended in the slightest bit. I thought he was being gentle, but firm--just like me. We moved on from that topic and discussed other things, then I was about to go to work. Before I left he said "Hey Luis, I just want to apologize with how I responded to you when you brought up the tithe. I shouldn't have been so harsh." Him saying that meant a lot to me. This has been my Evergreen experience.

[Janet Easson Martin]

I'm glad some of you may have had a good experience with bringing unbiblical practices to GCx's attention.  I got a smile from a leader also when I laid out the controlling practices I experienced and observed before I left. However, I heard first hand from someone who questioned this leader as to why I left that he replied in a skeptical manner with a short dismissing comment regarding my concerns.  What they say to us and what they say to others can be very different.  I personally feel these churches in general have suppressed complaints by controlling who people talk to and what they read; and of course, by telling their members it is SIN to bring an accusation against a leader.  Even now, members (leaders ?) threatening others with a lawsuit for speaking the TRUTH on here.  The title of this site is GCMWarning.  It is meant to warn others of spiritual abuse, and now more recently, abuse of a sexual nature.  

This is what God threatens from His Word about this kind of repression and gagging of the truth:

"Therefore, this is what the Holy One of Israel says:
"Because you have rejected this message,
Relied on oppression
and depended on deceit,
this sin will become for you like a high wall, cracked and bulging,
that collapses suddenly in an instant."

Read Isaiah 30:9-11 which precedes this passage.  It speaks of what GCx says of many people bringing totalitarian and ruthless practices to their attention personally or posting them here!

[DarthVader]

Hey Luis - Thanks for sharing your experience; mine has been similar.  The pastor at my location is very open to sharing his own flaws (from the pulpit) and very respectful in discussing other points of view. He is actually my best friend.  This is no doubt the experience of many - my location feels nothing like the GCM of old that I see here (no excommunications, no shunning, no telling people how to live their lives.)  Our ECC board representative does not homeschool (gasp) and may not have spanked his kids (double gasp).
 
My issues with GCM churches are more structural - with a benign pastor with a servants heart, almost any church can provide a good experience like you and I have had.  My problems with GCM churches are where they are outliers with the rest of evangelical Christianity:

1) There is NO check or balance on pastoral authority - if your pastor is a humble, servant-hearted guy, mature and open to feedback, it probably feels like a "normal" church, but if not, there is literally no one in the congregation who can stand up to this.  Even if 100% of the congregation lost faith in the pastor, they have NO power to remove him.  Only a board (which the pastors appoint) has this power.  This is a complete outlier with every mainstream evangelical church.
2) On that topic - having a secret board appointed by the pastors they are supposed to be overseeing is weird, bad governance and an outlier period.
3) Christian's have been studying God's word for 2000 years - there is much good thinking that has been done on how to live a Christian walk and spending a few years learning (e.g., in seminary) about how God has moved over the course of time (prior to Jim McCotter's heavenly vision) might be beneficial.  Does hiring a brand new Master of Divinity student as a pastor have problems - yes, but having no minimum education requirement for a pastor has its own problems.  You're an engineer - would you feel comfortable in a model where existing engineers got to pick the new ones and it was all self-study (and firing bad ones was practically impossible)..
4) The pastor's pick the other pastors model is flawed.  It can lead to excessive legalism (e.g., you have to prove yourself "worthy" to the other pastors) and give the existing pastors excessive power over the life of an aspiring pastor-to-be.
5) No doubt GCM churches have done good - you've felt it, I've felt it.  The question is why so much (relative) bad has come along with the good.  Being an analytical guy- here's a exercise you might enjoy.  Find your best estimate for the size of GCM (my guess is <50K people).  Compare it to the size of Evangelical Free (350K plus) Presbyterian Church of America (Tim Keller's denomination) (400K+) Baptist General Conference/Converge/ (John Piper's denomination) - (200K plus) members. Then go find the Ev Free X website, the PCAx website, the Converage X website...you won't find them although they are multiples larger than GCM and have been around much longer than McCotter.  Do you have thoughts on why that is?  Or why no one has ever mistaken those much larger groups for cults?

Just my thoughts..I'm really torn right now as I love my church, love my pastors, and if I could pick it up and drop it under the EV Free, PCA, Converge banners, I'd probably stay forever..but I see no redeeming qualities in GCM as a denomination.  It was started by very flawed people who thought they knew better than everyone else and has been recovering in fits and starts from that birth, which has been hindered because there are still a lot of those who think the good old GCM days were just fine and we should get back to them (shudder)...I'd welcome your thoughts.

[AgathaL'Orange]

Wow, DV, you nailed this 100%. 

[LuisCamachoIII]

Hey Luis ... I'd welcome your thoughts.

Hi DV,

Your welcoming of my thoughts is most welcome . I'll respond to these. Though realize that my evidence is anecdotal, and therefore limited. I've also only ever attended Evergreen (and visited Walnut Creek a lot) so I can't speak to the "GC sub-cultures" of the 100 other GC churches. The bigger GC gets the more diverse your answers here would be. I'm sure GC does it a little different in California or New York or Milan.

1) There is NO check or balance on pastoral authority...there is literally no one in the congregation who can stand up to this...they have NO power to remove him....Only a board (which the pastors appoint) has this power.:  I agree that Evergreen is very much Pastor led, and probably moreso than most other churches, but do the pastors have TOO much power? I don't think so. And are there NO checks and balances? I think that's a bit extreme as well. Some examples of checks and balances: we have a Pastor Advisory board consisting of people voted in by the congregation. We emphasize plurality of leadership to make sure that no one guy runs the show. All prospective pastors are brought up to the congregation before they're recognized and anyone is allowed to bring up anything about them. Pastors can get, and have been, fired based on things brought up by the congregation.
We look at the new testament and aim to make our church structure as much like theirs as we can. I think I see in my churches a pastoral structure very much like the one shown in the book of Acts. Is it perfect? Naw, man. But I think it's close.

2) On that topic - having a secret board appointed by the pastors they are supposed to be overseeing is weird, bad governance and an outlier period. I will admit right now that I don't know hardly anything about the board or what they do. But you got my gears turning. Next time I run into one of my pastors I'll grill them for details . Though I fear I must tread lightly because, according to some on this board, asking such a question to one of our perfect elders would get me excommunicated

3) No minimum education requirement for a pastor What was the minimum educational requirement for Jesus' disciples? What is the minimum educational requirement outlined in the pastoral epistles? I'm not trying to sound snarky, but Jesus and Paul seemed to prioritize character far more than education, and so do we. I guess I don't see why this is a problem at all. Have you been personally hurt or seen someone hurt because a pastor lacked something he could have only learned in seminary? I've yet to run into that. Personally, I get the feeling that the whole church, GC and non-GC, is starting to realize that too much emphasis has been put on seminary training and its discouraging young men that don't want to spend thousands on seminary from seeking the pastorship. But that last sentence is 100% my opinion.

4) The pastor's pick the other pastors model is flawed. It can lead to excessive legalism (e.g., you have to prove yourself "worthy" to the other pastors) and give the existing pastors excessive power over the life of an aspiring pastor-to-be. I once heard a quote that said "Democracy is the worst form of government--except for all the others." Sure the model can lead to flawed results, but I think that's only because it involves flawed people. Besides, this is the process that seems to be shown in the early church. And of course it can lead to legalism--every model can. If we only hired those with their MDiv and it needed a 3/4 congregational vote to pass then you could say "It can lead to excessive legalism. It gives the voting congregation excessive power over the life of an aspiring pastor-to-be."

5) Why don't other bigger, older denoms have a warning site? Yeeahh, these kinds of arguments don't really resonate with me. Didn't Jesus say that those who follow him will be persecuted, hated, reviled, and lied about? To this argument I could so easily say "Heck yeah we're hated! So was Jesus! That means we're following Jesus, boo ya!" .  But I have another thought: GC is just 50 years old. It's still a baby denomination with a goal of realizing new testament Christianity in action today. We're still figuring things out and constantly self-analyzing and improving our view of things. These other denoms you mention have been around for hundreds of years or more, or at least they were spinoffs of denominations whose foundations were around that long. I'm sure they were all called cults within their first half-century of existence. Simply having a group of people against your church doesn't indicate to me that you aren't (or are) following God.

[Huldah]

3) No minimum education requirement for a pastor What was the minimum educational requirement for Jesus' disciples? What is the minimum educational requirement outlined in the pastoral epistles?

It's not really the same thing. The Apostles spent three years in the personal company of Jesus. They all spoke the same language He spoke. They shared the same culture. They all understood the Old Testament background and references in a way that modern most Christians don't. By contrast, modern pastors face the challenge of trying to understand and teach a document written in another language by people whose culture disappeared nearly 2,000 years ago. There's a lot to be gained from a formal education at the hands of professors who've spent a lifetime specializing in the languages and historical/cultural background of the New Testament.

Also, based on my long-ago experience at a GC church (not Evergreen), the leaders had only a spotty knowledge of the Bible. I had a conversation once with one the deacons at my church, who shortly thereafter became an elder and is now a national leader. I pointed out some things to him that he didn't even know were in the Bible, things that contradicted some of what was being taught. (Nothing about the teaching changed after that conversation, by the way.) The leadership concentrated on a narrow scope of doctrine along with their favorite proof texts, ignoring a great deal of important material outside that scope. To the best of my knowledge, none of them had ever had any formal, systematic training in the Bible. In their limited, self-taught knowledge, they did a lot of harm to a lot of people. Perhaps it's different at Evergreen, but then one has to ask, where did the Evergreen pastors get their training? From the same relatively ignorant people who started the Blitz movement? I don't know; perhaps you could shed some light there.

[DarthVader]

Hey Luis - Thanks for your thoughts.  Some replies;

1) "I agree that Evergreen is very much Pastor led, and probably moreso than most other churches, but do the pastors have TOO much power? I don't think so." - "I don't think so" is not a fact-based argument, just an assertion. It doesn't really further the dialog if you don't say why or provide any facts to back up why.

2) "we have a Pastor Advisory board consisting of people voted in by the congregation"  - Our location does not, I'm not aware that ECC Bloomington does, but I agree having this would be better than not, even if they have no real authority of any kind at all.

3) "We emphasize plurality of leadership to make sure that no one guy runs the show" - This is called mutual accountability. I can see potential problems with that e.g., at Lakeville is there a pastor on staff who does not owe his position in some way to Mark Bowen's support? Do you see any potential issues with that if Mark ever has an issue..Yes, another pastor (appointed by Mark) may be brave enough to challenge Mark, but should we rely.

4) "Pastors can get, and have been, fired based on things brought up by the congregation" - I am unaware of this happening.  Do you have facts?  My understanding is the ECC board would have had to be the body doing this, correct? E.g., to use a Lakeville example, Mark Bowen, being just one among equal pastors couldn't fire someone on Lakeville staff correct? The congregation or advisory board have no authority to fire someone, so how exactly did this happen? Who made the decision? Without facts, it's hard for me to assess the validity of your statement.

5) "We look at the new testament and aim to make our church structure as much like theirs as we can. I think I see in my churches a pastoral structure very much like the one shown in the book of Acts. Is it perfect? Naw, man. But I think it's close"

a) Acts is a book of early church history Why should it be used as the model for church structure in the 21st century - was that command by God - if so, please provide the scripture reference?
b) Are you all selling your homes to provide for each others needs?  They did in Acts, right? If not, why aren't you?
c) Just to be clear, are you saying GCM is closer to the authentic new testament church than any other denomination?

3) Character and education aren't exclusive. I don't disagree that over valuing formal education vs. character is wrong.  Is it possible the opposite extreme - not valuing education - at all -  (GCM model) is also wrong? Yes - they did not have seminary in the new testament, they had Jesus and those who walked with him for 3 years they also didn't have powerpoint, pianos, etc. More importantly, they also didn't have the benefit of 2000 years of Christians every bit as good and wise as anyone at GCM pouring their heart, soul and prayers into understanding the Word - that's of little value to you? Not much we can learn from the past 2000 years?  Yes - if I was dropped on a desert island with only my Bible, I'd be fine...but we are not in the situation - why not use all the resources God has given us to prepare one for ministry?

The only Apostle selected by Jesus during the church era (Acts and beyond) - Paul - was doing what before he saw the light on the road to Damascus?..He was a plumber? No..he was educated by the most esteemed religious teachers of the day.  To use that example - 100% of those picked by Christ after the church was established had formal religious education.  Those with formal religious education understand the context of Acts, while my observation is most aberrant churches tend to treat it as a book of doctrine - which it is most definitely not.  Nearly every cult (not saying GCM is one) uses that verse in Acts about selling possessions and sharing right before they pack up for the compound in Waco.

4)  "And of course it can lead to legalism--every model can. If we only hired those with their MDiv and it needed a 3/4 congregational vote to pass then you could say "It can lead to excessive legalism. It gives the voting congregation excessive power over the life of an aspiring pastor-to-be"

 I'm not sure I see the logic here as a congregation voting on a pastor (with credentials) is usually looking at three things 1) Resume 2) References 3) Performance during 1:1 interviews & perhaps a sermon or 2. Can you not see that is a completely different dynamic that coming into an EC church everyday for years hoping you don't make Mark Bowen or Darling or Brent Knox unhappy or disappointed with you until you get your hoped for promotion to pastor?

5) "Why don't other bigger, older denoms have a warning site? Yeeahh, these kinds of arguments don't really resonate with me. Didn't Jesus say that those who follow him will be persecuted, hated, reviled, and lied about? To this argument I could so easily say "Heck yeah we're hated! So was Jesus! That means we're following Jesus, boo ya!"  -

Wow...My understanding was the persecution that Jesus was talking about was from a world who doesn't want to hear his message, e.g., the kings and governors, etc...I don't see a world rejecting Jesus' message on this website - do you?  I see people fellow believers sincerely trying to follow Christ, who've been hurt in relatively large proportion to others who've been helped...Do you really think that merits a boo ya?

I'm happy to continue the conversation and wish you the best in your walk - ECC is definitely better than not going to church

[GodisFaithful]

DV, I really appreciate your thoughtful comments.  Thanks for sharing what you are thinking.  I am glad you can be candid here.

Problem is, GTA thinks you might be burned toast.