Sex

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.

[araignee19]

Screen shots of what he has said. I did not screen shot his threats. If I had them I could put together something. Did anyone take screen shots before Jeromy deleted and white washed he postings?

Yup indeedy. I saved PDFs of everything Jeromy and a few others said (pretty sure it was before he changed any of it, but I might have missed a few edits). I also took screenshots of some of the most vulgar stuff right away. I had a feeling it would be edited or removed at some point without apology or correction.

[blonde]

My take-away is that I found the love-sex-porn video to me all but a stream of consciousness monologue.  In literary criticism, you could say, that stream of consciousness is a narrative mode that attempts to depict the multitudinous thoughts and feelings which pass through the mind without thinking. It was taxing to listen to it. It has the same cadence throughout the whole monologue. It just went on and on and on. It was like he never ever finished his first sentence (or thought); never getting to the conflict-point or the tipping point, climax of the narrative to make a direct thought, conscious. To materialize one succinct thought. Not a stream of conscious. The whole thing was like one LONG sentence. Just It's hard to describe; the best is that stream of consciousness was the way it was done. (Jeromy's sermons are like that too.)

As an aside, one scene was at Mickey's Diner in downtown St. Paul on West 7th. I've sat in that same booth. I didn't tap the old radio on the table like Jeromy pointing out letters. The side-shots were pretty good in that scene. They have pretty good burgers and fries.

[blonde]

P.S. After watching segments of it again tonight, parts of the stream of consciousness monologue, for me, were full of anger, and verged on a bit of little raging. Jeromy slapped the papers against the wall when he was in the alley way, wearing the American flag. I am not sure I like that either, the US flag as a scarf accessory.

[Huldah]

I didn't watch the whole video. I disliked the way he revealed some personal and private things from his wife's life, in a way that was completely unnecessary to the point he was making. I bailed out shortly after that part.

[GodisFaithful]

I bailed before that so did not see that part. I'm done. I saw enough.

I have seen sexuality and the importance of moral purity, from a Christian perspective, presented in a God honoring way without the weirdness.

[OneOfMany]

I didn't watch the whole video. I disliked the way he revealed some personal and private things from his wife's life, in a way that was completely unnecessary to the point he was making. I bailed out shortly after that part.

Sharing his wife's private experiences is a pattern at Evergreen, and shows extremely poor boundaries.

[Linda]

I didn't watch the whole video. I disliked the way he revealed some personal and private things from his wife's life, in a way that was completely unnecessary to the point he was making. I bailed out shortly after that part.

I've been watching portions of the video.

I started at the beginning with the unattributed C.S. Lewis quote and watched a few more minutes.

Then, I went back when you mentioned giving details about his wife's past.

I totally agree, it was unnecessary and inappropriate.

One rule of thumb I have heard many legit pastors say is that personal examples should be few, but if a personal example is given the pastor should always be the "villain". In other words, you should never tell about something you did right (I was a virgin) and something someone else did wrong (My wife slept around and got drunk a lot).

Then, when he went to the hotel where they spent their wedding night and started talking about it I had to turn it off. Is nothing sacred?

I think with ECC, sometimes the answer to that is no. I have heard (from someone who was there) that in at least one small group, a couple gave a detailed description of their honeymoon. I have also heard that personal, private conversations about sex (frequency and positions) were discussed regularly. This is sick. This is perverted.

In addition, I have listened to marriage seminar talks (currently available online, but downloaded by me just in case) that cross boundaries and give descriptions of personal likes and dislikes, etc.

There seems to be an unhealthy focus on sex that perhaps makes it harder to see boundaries for people in the system and perhaps has led to the sad situation that is currently developing at ECC.

[Badger]

I didn't watch the whole video. I disliked the way he revealed some personal and private things from his wife's life, in a way that was completely unnecessary to the point he was making. I bailed out shortly after that part.

Then, I went back when you mentioned giving details about his wife's past.

I totally agree, it was unnecessary and inappropriate...

Then, when he went to the hotel where they spent their wedding night and started talking about it I had to turn it off. Is nothing sacred?

I think with ECC, sometimes the answer to that is no. I have heard (from someone who was there) that in at least one small group, a couple gave a detailed description of their honeymoon. I have also heard that personal, private conversations about sex (frequency and positions) were discussed regularly. This is sick. This is perverted.

I personally have been disgusted about everything that has been brought up in this discussion.

I was brought up in the purity culture of Evangelicalism and had it put on steroids by GCM.  Both my wife and I were virgins when we married, but there is so much more for a church to focus on than sexual purity.  What ever happened to focusing on righteousness and circumcision/purity of the heart despite past sin?  And why put extra emphasis on sexual sins more than any other sin?

In comment to Jeromy and Evergreen Church discussing details of Honeymoon nights, does this not strengthen the testimony of the women who said Mark Darling asked appropriate questions in this arena?

I am also disgusted that Jeromy uses his wife's past in the way he does.

[AgathaL'Orange]

I agree about the inappropriate sharing of other people's stories.  I don't care if you do have their consent, it's still distasteful in that setting.  I think it would be mildly better in writing or a written story.

It backed up to me the claims of Mark D's inappropriate sharing.  I watched it ages ago, and those were all my thoughts. 

Well, and also my theory is that the hyperfocus on gender roles and sex, makes me think that many men here have a rescuer complex.  They want to be the hero, the good guy, and in doing so, I think they exploit some things for their own benefit.  Just a theory.  It's just, I've been there, and I get this in other ways, so I think it's possible that could be part of what is going on.

[pvitartas]

Generally, I appreciate the bringing up of memories - it helps me heal. I have to laugh and smile, in my day, we were taught that introspection was negative; looking back.

I do recall brothers being encouraged to marry because marriage was better than to "burn."  In retrospect, the clear connotation was to use one's wife for a sexual release.  With emphasis on the word "use."

Marriage then became a pragmatic way to cure sexual addiction, or lust.  Perhaps with some couples, love could be found somewhere.

[AlwaysNeedMoreInfo]

So let me get this straight - Jeromy strongly believes that premarital sex and pornography are destructive, and has a ministry where he explains to young people why that is. Blonde insinuates he's a pedophile, but y'all are ok with that because he said mean words to you when you had out torches and pitchforks coming after his dad? And because he didn't attribute one quote in a video? And because a high-school kid said that his talk made them feel a little bit uncomfortable? I felt pretty dang uncomfortable in high school health class too when the teacher started talking about erections, precum, and venereal diseases. There's something wrong here, but it's not Jeromy. In fact, seeing as how the entire Darling family has left ECC, this entire thread is clearly more about a personal vendetta than any problems with ECC.

[Linda]

So let me get this straight - Jeromy strongly believes that premarital sex and pornography are destructive, and has a ministry where he explains to young people why that is. Blonde insinuates he's a pedophile, but y'all are ok with that because he said mean words to you when you had out torches and pitchforks coming after his dad? And because he didn't attribute one quote in a video? And because a high-school kid said that his talk made them feel a little bit uncomfortable? I felt pretty dang uncomfortable in high school health class too when the teacher started talking about erections, precum, and venereal diseases. There's something wrong here, but it's not Jeromy. In fact, seeing as how the entire Darling family has left ECC, this entire thread is clearly more about a personal vendetta than any problems with ECC.

You don’t have this straight at all. This thread started as a discussion of flawed teaching of GCC on sex.

As discussions do, it morphed into comments about Jeromy’s video and his preoccupation with sex and saying “in your face” words to high school students.  No one has suggested he is a pedophile. No one has suggested there is anything wrong with telling teens (or anyone) that premarital sex and porn have extremely negative physical, emotional, and spiritual consequences.

Jeromy and his friends came on this forum and for months bullied and intimidated honest Christians who were trying to seek truth and bring dark things into the light. The BOT of ECC found many of the accusations to be valid and as a consequence revoked Jeromy’s dad’s ordination. Jeromy and his friend’s weeks of arguing lacked grace and self control and in the end they left without any acknowledgment of the truth (except for Adam). In spite of that, the discussion here was of substance. Again, see the first post of this thread. It’s a discussion of faulty GCC teaching on marital sex.

[AlwaysNeedMoreInfo]

So let me get this straight - Jeromy strongly believes that premarital sex and pornography are destructive, and has a ministry where he explains to young people why that is. Blonde insinuates he's a pedophile, but y'all are ok with that because he said mean words to you when you had out torches and pitchforks coming after his dad? And because he didn't attribute one quote in a video? And because a high-school kid said that his talk made them feel a little bit uncomfortable? I felt pretty dang uncomfortable in high school health class too when the teacher started talking about erections, precum, and venereal diseases. There's something wrong here, but it's not Jeromy. In fact, seeing as how the entire Darling family has left ECC, this entire thread is clearly more about a personal vendetta than any problems with ECC.

You don’t have this straight at all. This thread started as a discussion of flawed teaching of GCC on sex.

As discussions do, it morphed into comments about Jeromy’s video and his preoccupation with sex and saying “in your face” words to high school students.  No one has suggested he is a pedophile. No one has suggested there is anything wrong with telling teens (or anyone) that premarital sex and porn have extremely negative physical, emotional, and spiritual consequences.

Jeromy and his friends came on this forum and for months bullied and intimidated honest Christians who were trying to seek truth and bring dark things into the light. The BOT of ECC found many of the accusations to be valid and as a consequence revoked Jeromy’s dad’s ordination. Jeromy and his friend’s weeks of arguing lacked grace and self control and in the end they left without any acknowledgment of the truth (except for Adam). In spite of that, the discussion here was of substance. Again, see the first post of this thread. It’s a discussion of faulty GCC teaching on marital sex.

I'm not trying to defend the way Jeromy spoke on this forum, but blonde in particular seems to be obsessed with making him out to be some sort of pervert. S/he didn't directly come out and call Jeromy a pedophile, but the implication is definitely there. The conversation didn't morph towards Jeromy, it was intentionally directed there by someone who has a grudge and I suspect probably hasn't even met Jeromy. Judging a person solely on a few angry, emotional responses to an extremely difficult situation and implying that they're a pervert and psychopath isn't grace. That's not understanding. That's vendetta and slander. If your only interactions with him in the past 15 years have been on this forum, it's really not a fair assessment to say that he's dark and disturbed. I can get really worked up about things that make me angry too. I've just worked really hard to develop the self-control to step back and provide calm, logical arguments for my positions. That's something very few people have taken the time to cultivate, in my experience. Outside of what was said here and in "the reckoning," I've never seen Jeromy upset or out of control. We're not best buds or anything, but I have spent the past 15ish years in pretty close proximity to him. Blonde brought him up with "look how creepy he is!" and y'all just dogpiled on, despite your only context being angry rants from a wounded son.

So again, I am in no way justifying what Jeromy said on here. I think there was some truth to some of it, but in the long run it didn't serve any purpose except to maybe make himself feel better about having "done something." But this witch hunt to turn any and everything he says and does (including all the stuff said in the Salvage Project thread into that statement) into some sort of narcissistic, psychopathic self aggrandizing is flat out wrong, and unGodly.

Susan was a teenager, 19 when Mark started his conversations with her. Jeromy is starting younger, and even on his website is proud that his talks makes them uncomfortable.

Hopefully he stays with young men, (BUT HE IS NOT!!!) By the mere fact that he lectures in co-ed, Minnesota public high school's, he is reaching out to younger women than 19. Beating his dad.

I find it very very harmful of his various topics to younger women than the age of consent at 18 or even 19. They are forced to listen to Jeromy's versions of facts, sexualized facts. It made one child uncomfortable. Sickening.

[Linda]

I've just worked really hard to develop the self-control to step back and provide calm, logical arguments for my positions. That's something very few people have taken the time to cultivate, in my experience.

I'm glad you are working hard to step back and be calm and logical, you might want to work on that skill a bit more.

Case in point.

Blonde insinuates he's a pedophile, but y'all are ok with that because he said mean words to you when you had out torches and pitchforks coming after his dad?

Let's parse this statement.

Blonde mentioned that SVD was 19 when Mark Darling began meeting alone with her and asking inappropriate questions of a sexual nature on a thread that began as a discussion of faulty GCC teaching and practice regarding sex.

Blonde also brought Jeromy's ministry into this because Jeromy repeatedly mentioned his ministry in his posts and invited people to learn more about his "ministry". Some of us did and found parts of it disturbing.

Blonde mentioned that Jeromy spoke to students in mixed sex school settings and questions whether or not parents are aware of Jeromy's in your face approach to abstinence teaching.

To jump to the conclusion that Jeromy is being accused of pedophilia is quite a leap.

But, you go even further when you say, "but y'all are ok with that because he said mean words to you when you had out torches and pitchforks coming after his dad".

Let me point out the lack of logic here.

You made the claim that some posters here (the ones who believed Suzanne's claims) thought Jeromy was being accused by blonde of pedophilia and did not speak up because Jeromy and his friends said mean things to us and about us.

First, to not disagree with someone does not mean that you agree with someone. In this case, it never occurred to me that blonde was making the accusation you suggested, so there would be no need to challenge him/her.

Second, not challenging something could be because you didn't have time (or consistent Internet access) to respond. It could be because you didn't see the post. It could be because you have a vendetta against someone and you want them to look bad.

In this case, you, Mr. or Mrs. "Rational, Calm, I Step Back and Don't Jump to Conclusions" took quite a leap of logic and jumped to some pretty big conclusions.

Finally, I would like to address your comment "you had out torches and pitchforks coming after his dad". Again, this is an emotional leap of logic. Some of us knew enough and believed enough of Suzanne's story to know there was some validity to her claims. Many of these claims were found true by the BOT after they received the report. This is not a matter of "torches and pitchforks". This is a matter of holding an elder to account. Sadly, Mark Darling would not have been held to account had these claims not been made public because the BOT report also made us aware of the fact that three sitting elders had known about these claims for many years and did nothing. It took brave women coming forward with their stories and allowing themselves to be called names and bullied to get to the truth.

[Huldah]

AlwasNeedMoreInfo,

When I read Blonde's comment, it did not in any way strike me as calling either Jeromy or Mark a pedophile. I believe you're reading something into it which was never intended.

You said you weren't trying to justify Jeromy's remarks on this forum, and yet you're excusing them as the grief of a wounded son. It was far more than that. It was an attempt to silence and intimidate the victims of gross and disgusting wrongdoing.

Jeromy has never treated you with the contempt he has shown toward us, but what does that prove? The way he treated his truthful opponents (whom the BOT of his own church vindicated) says far more about his character than the way he treats the people who agree with him.

[Rebel in a Good Way]

The OP commented on how some GCC pastors approach teaching about sex, and believes it's related to their own sexual maladjustment.  This seems to be true in the case of Mark Darling who acted out sexually against women, and since Jeromy is Mark's self-proclaimed protege, it is not "persecution" to have concerns about his sexual ethic.   

I don’t know about you all but I heard a lot of “preaching” that men biologically need sex every three days so they can think clearly and manage their attitude. One pastor told a group of men, “I am grumpy today because ______  gave me sex too late in the morning.” 

I would like to expose this lie. Many if not all the men who I heard give this message at one time was highly addicted to porn. They have admitted to this. They also say they overcame this addiction through prayer, bible memorization, and accountability. I’ve never heard them say they overcame it with intense therapy with a paid counselor who helped them root out the cause of their addiction. I have sad news, these men (pastors) are still addicted to sex and are using their wives to feel okay about it. Furthermore they are abusing their entire church to try to normalize their behavior.

Honestly, let’s think this through. Do you know any single men that are able to think and manage their attitude?  Know any older men who have lost their wife but are still functioning well? 

Such a gross abuse of the church.

[Mango]

What a sad group of people you are. This thread is beyond pathetic. I really wonder how you justify this.

[Ghost]

Wow..all the old derisive fruits..sprang to life again..why don't all the rotten fruits and Md fanatics just die off..they serve no nutritional value to the soul.......sad to say....

[Linda]

What a sad group of people you are. This thread is beyond pathetic. I really wonder how you justify this.

Gaslighting.

[Huldah]

What a sad group of people you are. This thread is beyond pathetic. I really wonder how you justify this.

What, exactly, is pathetic about this thread? Is any of the information untrue or inaccurate? Is it somehow irrelevant to the question of the Darlings spiritual fitness to serve? Or did you just drop by to remind us once again how much you dislike us?