Faithwalkers West 2009

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.

[AgathaL'Orange]

Edited to add hyperlink:

I can't believe the message by Rick and Rory Whitney.  It is so legalistic and judgmental.  I don't know which is worse, the "habit" of never capitalizing "Satan" or the prayer where people are chastised (during the prayer) for not being able to focus for prayer or taking their hats off.  (Of course that is proper, but honestly... during the prayer?)  Anyway, the whole message is just horrible.

http://gccweb.org/conferences/faithwalkers/west/2009_teachings

Go here to find FW West Sermons.

[AgathaL'Orange]

By the way, that is a triggering message... so keep that in mind.

[wastedyearsthere]

Was the Faith Walker 2009 posted so we can listen to it?

[AgathaL'Orange]

I edited my message to add the link, WYT.  Thanks for pointing that out!

[AgathaL'Orange]

And now I'm listening to Bill Young's message.  He plays the clip from Schindler's List where Schindler weeps and cries out, "I could have saved more!"  He parallels this with how we should feel about people going to hell.  How we shouldn't live lives of regret.  Of course, saving people the GC way is the way to live a life with no regret.  Unfortunately that isn't true.  Instead I feel regret over the people I led astray when I was in GC.  But deeper than that, I don't think that the weight of everyone's sin and futures should be on OUR shoulders!  Christ took that burden.  Yes, we should share, but he's equating shopping and living a pleasant life with your family with basically sending people to hell and is using the Schindler example of the kind of regret we will feel over such shallow living. 

[EverAStudent]

GC elders hate it when you quote this set of verses:

and to make it your ambition to lead a quiet life and attend to your own business and work with your hands, just as we commanded you, so that you will behave properly toward outsiders and not be in any need. (1 Thessalonians 4:11-12) 

[LucyB]

So Rory Whitney never prays with a hat on. While it is customary for a man to remove his hat during public prayer, there is no reason to remove a hat during private prayer. I remember all the wonderful times I've prayed while riding my bike (with a bike helmet). I'm so glad I serve a God that wants to talk to me with or without a hat because he loves me. I also can't help but remember that Jesus most certainly covered his head while praying, in keeping with ancient Jewish custom. Where do they come up with this stuff? It's just silly. The sad thing is the focus on what we do to please God, rather than accepting his mercy and unconditional love.

[Linda]

I'm halfway through it. Very odd (and triggering, thanks for the head's up, Agatha). Strangely, the quirky hat's off, spell God with a big G and Satan with a little s don't bother me as much (note I say as much) as the talk about commitment to the group.

It is absolutely wrong to consider commitment to GC something to hold dear. There is ONE, I repeat ONE, body. All Christians are part of it. Pastors, elders, adults, children, men, women, all Believers are part of ONE church. That church is the Bride of Christ. Jesus is not a polygamist. The Church is not the bride of the pastor (as we were told by one ECC pastor). The pastor is not the head of the Church (as we were told by a different ECC pastor), Christ is. Commitment to the local church for life makes no sense to anyone who understands what the Church is. Again, perhaps a little theological training would help here, however, most lay people who have been Christians for more than a year or two should understand this.

I feel sorry for these men who obviously are sincere in their beliefs (which they learned at the feet of McCotter), but are teaching things that are incorrect about the Bride of Christ. Surely, someone in the ranks of elder, knows better. I beg you, if you understand how wrong it is to suggest that commitment to a GC church for life demonstrates a higher love for God, speak up. Stand for the truth. Don't cover up bad/false teaching. Be a leader and lead by correcting bad teaching. Don't allow Believers, especially young Believers to be led astray.

[Linda]

Getting back to the topic of prayer and hats and Christian proofreading, was he saying that he is more "spiritual" because of those things? Not sure what the point was. Was he chiding those who may have been wearing a hat? Furthermore, if a pastor really believed those were "Christian" principles, shouldn't they have been "taught"--chapter and verse? (I'd love to see the chapter and verse on that one. I suppose it would be the impropriety of men covering their heads--which I think applied to more than just prayer. I know the Ames church used to make women cover their heads. Anyone know when and why that ended?) The whole talk smacked of pride. "Look at me, I do all these things right. You don't even know about these things." Maybe he's just getting Boy Scout etiquette mixed up with seminar etiquette!

BTW, I'm all for etiquette and personally think men should remove their hats when entering a building because it is culturally proper, but I know most young men have never heard of that rule, so why would I sit in judgment on them when they enter a building with a cap on? End of rant.

And, about staying off the Internet, I couldn't help but smile. If you stay off the Internet, you won't stumble upon this site!

[wastedyearsthere]

The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible says, in 1 Corinthians 11:4-7 :

Any man who prays or propehsies with something on his head disgraces his head, but any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled disgraces her head--it is one and the same thing as having her head shaved. For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or to be shaved, she should wear a veil. For a man ought not to have his head veiled, since he is the image and relection of God; but woman is the reflection of man.

So, yes, the New Testament of the Christian Bible says that women should cover their heads when they pray, and men should not.
I think this is where GCI gets it from.  Does that mean women are now covering their heads while praying? 

Ames church did this practice from the 70's until the middle 80's.  No teaching on why it ended.  It just ended with no discussion or teaching that I can remember.   I was told that women needed to cover our heads while praying since the angels were learning by the "sister's" submission to men's leadership. If this is true -- why would the practice end? 

[Linda]

I figured those would be the verses he would quote when pressed. It's just that this was a seminar, not a church service. Also, I haven't been aware of the head covered/uncovered thing being taught in GC churches in recent years. I have female friends who attend Brethren churches, and they wear hats during the service. I don't find that odd. What I would find odd is if they one day showed up in church not wearing a hat and were suddenly told hats were expected. I wonder why this was such a big deal all of a sudden. Usually things that are big deals are accompanied by a little more explanation and/or teaching than someone saying, "Here's what I do and you should do it too."

Interestingly enough, this jogged my memory to an event that took place a decade or so ago. My son, in high school at the time, was leaving to play bass in the morning worship band at a combined gathering of all ECC churches. As he was leaving early in the morning, I noticed he had on a "funky" hat. I said, "Are you going to wear that hat while you play during worship?" And, suggested that the hat was more suited towards a performance, rather than worship and it might call attention to him and take away from God.

He dutifully heeded my advice. However, much to my dismay, during the afternoon worship, a band from a different location played. This was from the college church. The bass player not only wore a hat, but during the worship songs, wandered all over the stage, into the audience, and worked people up into a frenzy that focused heavily on the bass player's skill and not so much on God. Hats didn't seem to be much of an issue back then.

Also, about the punctuation, I'm wondering, when this particular pastor is typing transcripts of talks at GC youth events and a pastor (who sits on the board) while addressing the high school students on a retreat away from home says the "f" word in his talk, does he type out the full word? Does he capitalize it? I'd like a ruling on that, please.

[EverAStudent]

Once again the lack of proper education of our onetime GC oversight rears its head (pun intended).  The 1 Corinthians 11:10 passage says women should display a visible sign that they are voluntarily under proper authority "because of the aggelos" meaning "pastor, messenger, or angel."  Most likely Paul meant that women ought to display a sign that they are willing to be voluntarily subject to a male patorate even as the women prophesied, prayed, or read aloud the Scriptures in church (Phoebe carried and read aloud Paul's letter to the Romans as a deaconess of the church). 

When GC used to teach that head coverings were to educate the angels, well, what sense does that make??

[AgathaL'Orange]

I guess for me what was weird about the hat thing was not that they were reminding men not to wear hats, but that later in the sermon, Rick prays about it and sounds incredulous at the stupidity of people who listen but don't immediately follow directions concerning the wearing of hats during prayer.  It's the looking around and checking up on people.  I find that incredibly offensive and I couldn't survive in that environment, which is why I hated ALL retreats.  Every single one sent me into a completely emotional funk.  In addition the phrase at the beginning by Rory is weird, "I do what my elder tells me to do."  (That is probably not word for word.  I'm quoting from memory right now).  It's a very rehearsed kind of phrase as though it's been used often.  Sorry.  Elders are not our commanders, people!  Also, Rory is saying habits he does, almost sheepishly, and then Rick later says, "The first half hour of this message will save your soul."  The message being, what?  That the habits are life changing?  I just find the intensity confusing as well as the actual "directives towards followers.  But what is effectively communicated is our inability to be good GC-ers.  I got that message loud and clear.

Very weird.  Very triggering.  Very, very confusing and yet takes it to the unspoken (or partially spoken) point.  "You are here for life.  Do what we tell you.  Model your life after us.  We are watching you.  We are in cahoots with God over leading you.  God approves of what I say.  I know what God thinks about you and about this retreat.  If you are a good GC person, you will die a good GC person.  Period."

[DesiringTruth]

"This year at Faithwalkers 2009, you will discover how you can be directly involved with Jesus Christ in changing the lives of others. You will learn the character, heart and skills you need to develop to be a God-empowered life changer."

Huh, I always thought that Jesus was the only life-changer.  This seems to go beyond semi-pelagianism, in my opinion, moving dangerously close to pelagianism.  Notice the emphasis centered on the man rather than on Christ.  Interesting how "Lifechanger" has always (in my past) been ascribed to our Savior.  "Salvation is of the Lord."  Amen.

One writer's definition of pelagianism and semi-pelagianism...

"Semipelagian thought stands in contrast to the earlier Pelagian teaching about salvation (in which man is seen as effecting his own salvation), which had been dismissed as heresy. Semipelagianism in its original form was developed as a compromise between Pelagianism and the teaching of Church Fathers such as Augustine of Hippo, who taught that man cannot come to God without the grace of God."

[DesiringTruth]

To clarify, I believe that God uses us as his instruments in the work of salvation and life change.  We are to be active in it, and we should learn to be better-skilled evangelists.  However, we are powerless to produce a single change.  This is of the Lord.  He alone receives all the glory if ever a person becomes a believer because each one is a miracle, and every step of the Christian life is produced by a miracle from God.

As C.H. Spurgeon said:

"Suppose that without divine aid you should try to save a soul-- you might as well attempt to make a world. Why, you cannot create even a fly, how can you create a new heart and a right spirit? Regeneration is a great mystery, it is out of your reach. What can you and I do in this matter? It is far beyond our line. We can share the truth of God with others; but to 'apply that truth to the heart and conscience' is quite another thing. I have preached Jesus Christ with my whole heart, and yet I know that I have never produced a saving effect upon a single unregenerate man unless the Spirit of God has opened the heart and placed the living seed of truth within it."

If you are not yet familiar with C.H. Spurgeon, I heartily encourage you to read about him.

[wastedyearsthere]

Thanks EAS for posting about the correct interpretation of headcoverings.  That was always the reason given for why women needed to have their heads covered when praying in Church.  I think this is just another example on why seminary is so necessary to pastor!!  Character without correct knowledge is NOT enough! 

[jat5453]

Some of you may remember me. I haven't posted in a very long time, because my life has been very busy lately. However, someone pointed out that they that seminary essential. I disagree. I do think that seminary is a wonderful thing, but I neither of my pastors have been to seminary. Yet, I have never heard an incorrect interpretation from them. Pastors need to do their research. I agree that there is no excuse for them not to. However, do you think that Peter or the majority of the pastors in the early church had formal training?

[LucyB]

Jat:
Why haven’t your pastors sought formal education? Could it be that it is because they are part of a movement that is so ingrown and prideful, they don’t appreciate the need for education from anyone outside of their movement? There is no question that God can use anyone to do his work. Seminary education in and of itself does not prepare anyone for ministry unless God uses that education to strengthen and enlighten the individual. Yet the Bible cautions against zeal without knowledge (Proverbs 19:2). Seminary teaches people how to interpret scripture in a way that is relevant to society today. They learn about the historical context of scripture. They learn how to discern the difference between an example of something that occurred in that place at that time and a teaching for the church today. This knowledge prevents them from such fallacious reasoning as using the example of Peter as a reason to not pursue a seminary education. I hate to be so snarky, but REALLY?     

[AgathaL'Orange]

 There is SO MUCH, so much history and context and language issues and interpretation when it comes to Christian doctrine.  It is so interesting to me that a little three ring binder is enough "training" to be a pastor.  Of course, pastoring isn't all about knowledge!  But it is necessary.  GC people may know what they believe, but they really don't know WHY they believe it.  They may say that it's strictly scriptural.  But every new sect says that.

[Linda]

Agreed, Agatha. I know many men who have not been to seminary who are pastors. However, they also found ways to learn church history, studied basic hermeneutics, etc.

A classic example for me of a verse that GC misinterprets often is Hebrews 13:17. On the surface that verse looks like you are to just do whatever pastor says. That verse, I believe, is a stumbling stone for many GC leaders and members. Not only do you need to know the Greek meaning of "obey", you also need to take that verse in the context of the Bible and in relationship to other verses. For example, Matthew 23 tells us that we are to make no man our master. 1 Peter 5:3 tells pastors that they are to lead by example and not by lording it over. I Timothy 5 tells us there is one mediator between God and man. 1 Corinthians 11:3 tells us that the head of every man is Christ.

A pastor trying to help me through this verse also pointed out that leadership in the New Testament is very different than leadership in the old. Disobeying Moses, for example, was equivalent to disobeying God. However, after Pentecost that changed. The Holy Spirit lives in all believers. God speaks in a different way after Jesus.

GC pastors really believe that they are to be obeyed in everything. They believe they have been ordained by God and we are to give the controls of our life to them. They have said this. One pastor told us, "Your job is to obey, mine is to give an account," implying that if he told us to do something and it was wrong, he would be the one taking the blame before God, he would be held accountable and not us."