GCC prints message on 'How False Information Can Spread'

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.

[FeministRebel]

Not sure when this was posted, but saw it today... http://www.gccweb.org/about/how-false-information-can-spread

And then this message on how using the internet is not the way to resolve conflicts. lol In other words, 'only talk to us, so that we'll tell you you're being rebellious, and need to just submit.' http://www.nae.net/resources/news/844-a-christian-perspective-of-internet-criticisms This one was written October 2012, apparently.

[Linda]

It is interesting to me how the author of these papers (Hopler?) sets out to discredit information people may find on the Internet that challenges GC teaching/theology by attacking the messenger rather than giving direct answers to the specific issues people have.

He begins the "false information" article with:

"...some secular newspapers wrote articles accusing churches in our movement of being a cult.  We understood then (as we understand today) that some people are quick to use the "cult" word in describing Christians who are serious in their devotion to Christ and who are actively sharing their faith."

First off, he chooses the adjective "secular" to describe the newspapers. I assume this was done to give the reader the notion that the problems being pointed out were basically accusations made by non-Christians. What he fails to mention is that a significant number of the issues brought up (obedience to self-appointed elders, lifetime commitment, etc.) were brought up by former members, their families, and other Christians.

He then goes on to brush off some serious accusations by suggesting that those who used the "cult" word were simply not understanding Christians who are devoted to Christ and actively sharing their faith.

Moving on, he says:

"Because Great Commission was a new movement that was not well known, unfair and exaggerated statements about our movement were published that were based on ignorance or false reports. Now and then some of these mischaracterizations of GCC from the 1970s appear on secular blogs and websites today."

Here he criticizes people from the past who had issues with the theology/practice of GC and makes some bold, unsubstantiated, slanderous attacks when he says people made unfair statements and even gave false reports. Then, he moves on to discredit this site by suggesting that those posting here have bought into those "false statements".

What he fails to note in this statement is that GC issued a 13 page statement of ERROR AND APOLOGY for the bad theology and practice that got them on the cult watch sites in the first place. Unfortunately, as documented in this paper and others, they spend more time defending the actions of the past rather than trying to correct them and they do this by criticizing people (they are anonymous, they are believing false reports, they aren't Christians, they are unfair, they lied) who point them out.

GC needs to own up to the 1991 Error/Apology Statement.
http://www.gcxweb.org/Misc/WeaknessesPaper.aspx

They need to stop making blanket ad hominem attacks on those who are pointing out their significant theological errors (like telling people to give the controls of their life to their local GC pastor for life, that's a pretty big error).

They need to publicly and as often as necessary correct their error and stop criticizing those who point it out.

[Huldah]

This has probably been discussed before, somewhere on this forum, but here goes anyway:

I'm surprised to see that GCC is a member of the NAE, and even more so that GCC has been given a forum to speak on the NAE website. Is the NAE aware of GCC's doctrinal errors or its intrusive and controlling practices?

There also seems to be a lack of discernment (on the NAE's part) in allowing the statement: "As followers of Christ, we are called to live by one rule: Love one another (John 13:34)." No, as followers of Christ, we are called to uphold both love and truth. We cannot separate the two or choose between them, since both are aspects of God's immutable nature. The leadership has been privately confronted many, many times on its doctrinal errors, but has never repented. All that's left is to expose the errors publicly, in the hope that others will be helped and warned.

[Linda]

Excellent points, Huldah.

My guess would be that the leadership at the NAE has no clue about the current practices of Great Commission. It certainly is not fitting with Protestant theology to teach that church members are to obey their elders in all matters and commit for life to their local church. It does demonstrate a lack of discernment on the part of NAE. Also, as you remember, they had Leith Anderson, the president of NAE as a guest at their last pastor's conference. The interview is on the GCC web page. I'm sure this was a feather in their cap. I'm almost positive Leith has no idea what this group teaches and practices.

GCC is using the NAE to gain credibility for some pretty unsound teaching. Very sad.

[araignee19]

Has anyone here ever drawn the NAE's attention to these issues?

[Linda]

I post here to warn others about the aberrant teaching of Great Commission. My thought about the NAE is that if it mattered to them, they are perfectly capable of doing research. My guess is that they just read the statement of faith (which looks good on paper) and take the membership $$$.

That said, a few years ago, when we first noted that GCM referred to this forum as "detractors", we posted about what GCM said about us and Tom Mauiello (the head honcho guy at GCM) actually posted here. He maintained that GCM and GCC were not related. We confronted him about the claim on the GCM site that they were members of the NAE.

At that point, I actually phoned the NAE. I believe I first spoke with someone out East and they referred me to someone in CO who was in charge of memberships. I contacted the membership person and simply asked, "Is Great Commission Ministries a member of your organization?" What should have been a simple answer turned into a confrontation when the man said, "Why do you want to know?" "Who are you?" I replied, "I want to know because GCM claims to be a member, yet I don't see them listed on your web page as a member. I am a person who noticed this."

The man then went on to say that GCM had applied. I asked when. Again, he seemed less than forthright. Finally, I believe I got it out of him that it had been quite recently (and most likely in response to us pointing it out on this forum). The general feeling I had from the conversation was that they had been warned that someone unfriendly to the Gospel might call them about this. Of course, I can't prove that, but the man was very rude and confrontational.

Here is that thread. Comment #75 discusses what I just mentioned.

http://forum.gcmwarning.com/general-discussion/gcc-and-gcm/60/

[Huldah]

Araignee19, I was wondering the same thing.

Linda, I don't see a link in your post and I didn't find the thread via the Search feature.

[Linda]

Oops, Huldah, that would be because I forgot to add it!
It's there now.

[Linda]

OK, here's something interesting, on that same thread, I wrote post number 30 right after my conversation with the NAE guy. Here is what I wrote.:

I just got off the phone with the director of membership of the NAE.

He told me at first that GCM was a member of the NAE.

I asked him, to clarify whether or not he meant GCC or GCM. He said, "Aren't they the same organization?"

I said, "No, they are two distinct organizations and I know that GCC is a member because they are listed on your web page, but I'm wondering whether or not GCM is a member."

His next question was rather troubling as he said, "Why do you want to know?" Like what business of it is his why I want to know?

I said, "Because their web page claims they are a member, but yours doesn't."

He then said GCM had recently applied, but currently was not a member. The board of the NAE would be meeting in three weeks to decide whether or not to grant GCM membership.

I asked him when GCM applied and all he would tell me was that it was sometime this month. I asked him whether or not it was last Friday and all he would say was that it was sometime in February.

So, as it stands GCM is NOT currently a member of the NAE although they claim to be on their web page.

[Huldah]

Thanks, Linda.

This fits a pattern that has bothered me from the beginning. GCx has always been a little careless with the details. In this case it was membership status; at other times, it's interpretation of Scripture, or fudging on whether or not certain doctrines are still being taught, or claiming to "conduct surveys" when we were really just proselytizing. The attitude was then and still seems to be now, "If our heart is in the right place, the details don't matter."

FWIW, John Hopler is currently listed as a member of the board of the NAE: http://www.nae.net/about-us/executive-leadership.

[crp87]

Well for me this kinda discredits the NAE. I have been so hesitant about looking at other churches and have been looking at the NAE among other organizations to hopefully find a church that would be more sound and a safe environment. If they care so little about checking out their members I can't trust their recommendations.  Disappointing. It seems that it is more than just GCx being careless with details.

Linda- the confrontational attitude they showed you is crazy. From my understanding the NAE is meant to -in a way- showcase churches that they believe are practicing biblical truth. You were inquiring about a supposed member and were immediately met with hostility. That is so disappointing. To me it seems to not only indicate a lack of care in choosing members but possibly even an endorsement of GCx. I can't see what other reason they would have to respond so aggressively to your question. 

[Linda]

I think the NAE means well, but they are just too big to be able to check out details about specific groups and denominations. On paper, we would probably all agree that GC looks pretty main stream evangelical.

The disappointment for me is how pastors and Christian leaders form sort of a network of support for each other. We can all probably think of times people ranted about things they don't like about churches (color of the carpet issues) and my guess would be that when the NAE saw this article, they were most likely thinking along those lines. Also, I think we all would agree with Hopler's points (on the NAE statement referenced above). The Internet is not the place to resolve personal conflicts.

That said, I would imagine that Leith Anderson has no idea that GC teaches giving the controls of your life to your local pastor for life. This is not "orthodox Protestantism" (a phrase Hopler used to describe GC in an article I recently read). On paper, they may look orthodox and protestant. In practice, they are most definitely not.

[Huldah]

I'm sure the NAE does mean well. (I would even assume as much about GCx, for that matter.) The NAE's goals appear to be political as much as spiritual, at least that's what I take away from their website. If that's truly the case--and I stress, if, because I don't know for sure--it explains why they'd have minimal vetting of the finer points of doctrine for potential members.

As for GCx and its lack of attention to detail, not to oversimplify things, but part of their problem might be rooted in a clash of personality types.  There are big-picture, "see the forest" people, and there are detail-oriented, "see the trees" people. Forest people tend to run organizations because they're good at it. Tree people support an organization by keeping it on course in the little things. That's important because the cumulative effect of multiple small errors is greater than the sum of the individual errors. In GC, unfortunately, tree people are viewed as rebels, malcontents, and loose cannon, attempting to undermine the organization, when in fact the tree people are genuinely supporting the organization in their own way. It's a sad waste of God-given gifts that were meant to strengthen the body.

[Linda]

I wonder what GC would think about the contraceptive controversy that the NAE got into a couple years ago for taking $$$ from a group that promoted contraceptives for unmarried people. It led Leith Anderson (the president of the NAE and recent guest at the GC pastor's conference) to comment:

"Evangelicals are conflicted about contraceptives outside of marriage because we never want to promote or condone sexual immorality. But we are told that contraceptives can reduce abortions and we want to stop abortions."

Here is an article about the controversy.

http://www.worldmag.com/2012/07/cashed_out

[FeministRebel]

Well, this has certainly hashed out a very interesting, and in-depth conversation. I came upon these letters/statements from GCx, because I was looking a bit further into their cult-watch-status. As some of you may know, I used to be a former member of the Ames GCx church, and am now an atheist.

Last week, I met with the Iowa State student Atheist and Agnostic Association, and found to my surprise, that they regularly hang out with students from the Rock for Q&A sessions, etc, or in social settings. This really has bothered me a bit, not really because of us being atheists and hanging out with believers, but because GCx is not a proper representation of healthy Christian belief/life. I feel they are at the very least, a spiritually abusive church, and in my personal perspective, cult-like. There are so many other campus churches which would be much better and healthier alternatives for this kind of exchange of ideas, or efforts to get to know or understand the other side. *shrug* Needless to say, I feel I can't hang out with them anymore, because I don't want to spend my time debating with folks who have such a narrow minded view of Christianity, and perverted ideas on Christian teaching. It hashed out too many bad things for me.

[Ned_Flanders]

As some of you may know, I used to be a former member of the Ames GCx church, and am now an atheist.

Last week, I met with the Iowa State student Atheist and Agnostic Association, and found to my surprise, that they regularly hang out with students from the Rock for Q&A sessions, etc, or in social settings. This really has bothered me a bit, not really because of us being atheists and hanging out with believers, but because GCx is not a proper representation of healthy Christian belief/life. I feel they are at the very least, a spiritually abusive church, and in my personal perspective, cult-like. There are so many other campus churches which would be much better and healthier alternatives for this kind of exchange of ideas, or efforts to get to know or understand the other side.

Hi FeministRebel,
I can completely understand your concern about people- I guess any group, really- hanging around with a bad example of Christianity like GCx.  I've been trying to come up with some other way to say this but I can't, so I'll just say in anyway: God is in control and He can certainly work with a bad example of His love and grace like The Rock ISU.  

FeministRebel, I know you are an atheist.  I respect your right to believe not to believe.  I came to the LORD before GCx and I was a part of a Church that was, in many ways, a lot worse than anything GCx was.  Anyway, as I've shared with you, there were people in GCx who came to hate me.  I left that Church a long time ago and I had a lot of hatred for them as well.  But God's grace helped me to overcome it.  I wasn't about to let those people destroy my faith in Christ.  

If these meetings between GCx and this atheist organization aren't for you, fine.  But I guess I'm just trying to say that I believe that God is always in control and He can work through anything, even a Church like GCx in helping Christians and atheists to understand each other better.    

[MidnightRider]

Last week, I met with the Iowa State student Atheist and Agnostic Association, and found to my surprise, that they regularly hang out with students from the Rock for Q&A sessions, etc, or in social settings. This really has bothered me a bit, not really because of us being atheists and hanging out with believers, but because GCx is not a proper representation of healthy Christian belief/life.

Maybe they are heretical atheists.

[FeministRebel]

har har

[FeministRebel]

As some of you may know, I used to be a former member of the Ames GCx church, and am now an atheist.

Last week, I met with the Iowa State student Atheist and Agnostic Association, and found to my surprise, that they regularly hang out with students from the Rock for Q&A sessions, etc, or in social settings. This really has bothered me a bit, not really because of us being atheists and hanging out with believers, but because GCx is not a proper representation of healthy Christian belief/life. I feel they are at the very least, a spiritually abusive church, and in my personal perspective, cult-like. There are so many other campus churches which would be much better and healthier alternatives for this kind of exchange of ideas, or efforts to get to know or understand the other side.

Hi FeministRebel,
I can completely understand your concern about people- I guess any group, really- hanging around with a bad example of Christianity like GCx.  I've been trying to come up with some other way to say this but I can't, so I'll just say in anyway: God is in control and He can certainly work with a bad example of His love and grace like The Rock ISU.  

FeministRebel, I know you are an atheist.  I respect your right to believe not to believe.  I came to the LORD before GCx and I was a part of a Church that was, in many ways, a lot worse than anything GCx was.  Anyway, as I've shared with you, there were people in GCx who came to hate me.  I left that Church a long time ago and I had a lot of hatred for them as well.  But God's grace helped me to overcome it.  I wasn't about to let those people destroy my faith in Christ.  

If these meetings between GCx and this atheist organization aren't for you, fine.  But I guess I'm just trying to say that I believe that God is always in control and He can work through anything, even a Church like GCx in helping Christians and atheists to understand each other better.    

I believe you misinterpreted my concerns. My concern is not whether "God" can use GCx to spread 'his message.' We are atheist, and we don't need conversion (just as you don't need to be converted to some other religion.) We, as atheists, see all of this as mythology (in the same way in which you may view other religions as mythology.)   

My concern is that I just don't think GCx people are safe for hanging out with ANYONE -- even other Christians, because they are a cultish, unhealthy bunch of people. I wouldn't wish these people on anyone else, even other Christians.

[Ned_Flanders]

I believe you misinterpreted my concerns. My concern is not whether "God" can use GCx to spread 'his message.' We are atheist, and we don't need conversion (just as you don't need to be converted to some other religion.) We, as atheists, see all of this as mythology (in the same way in which you may view other religions as mythology.)    

My concern is that I just don't think GCx people are safe for hanging out with ANYONE -- even other Christians, because they are a cultish, unhealthy bunch of people. I wouldn't wish these people on anyone else, even other Christians.

With all due respect, I didn't misunderstand your concerns at all.  If you read my post carefully, it's not about converting or convincing anyone.  As I said, I respect your right to be an atheist.  I absolutely appreciated the conversations we had before; I completely understand why you left that place and do not think you're a bad person.  But I'm not going to deny what I believe, either.  Not in this conversation or anywhere else.  

I agree with you that GCx Christians- some, many or most but I would not say all- are lousy ambassadors of the Christian Church.  I found many of those people to be shame-based, legalistic, immature, narrow-minded, racist, sexist and just plain weird.  But, even with all of that, I'm not worried about it because I believe God can work with it, for the benefit of both sides there.  I hope you understand my saying that is not my trying to "convert" you or anyone else.  I'm just glad I'm converted myself.