Unity at any cost?

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.

[Linda]

If you go from being single to married, you are procedurally switched to a new small group.

One of the more absurd thing I experienced with this was just the opposite. I was in a small group where the wife died of cancer. I think we had been together in this small group for 2 years. She died in October right as small groups were starting up for the year and the husband had to now attend a new, singles small group because he was no longer married!

I couldn't figure out why the small group wouldn't stay together for the sake of this man and his kids. After all, we knew the situation and had been meeting and praying together through her cancer treatments. It was one of those things that I attributed to the leaders not having a lot of experience in small group leadership, but now I'm thinking that there must be a rule book (probably in those secret GCLI papers!) that specifies the terms of small groups.

We invest out of obedience to God and his word. There really is nothing natural about this.

The "love one anothers" in the Bible apply to the entire Church, to all Christians everywhere. You are no less obligated to a believer attending a different church building than you are to one at the church building you go to. When you only commit to a certain group of Christians because they are the ones you meet with most, you are being elitist and in violation of scripture. This is the cause of divisions.

Oh, and one other thing that is wacky. If you are going to make the case for commitment to your local body for the rest of your life, what are you saying when you include that to be the entire movement. In other words, it seems to not be church shopping if you move from a GCM church in MN to one in Iowa. But, if you move from a GCM church in MN to a different church in MN you are violating the idea of unity. Can't you see the elitism here? Guess not.

I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.  For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers.  What I mean is that each one of you says, I follow Paul, or I follow Apollos, or I follow Cephas, or I follow Christ.  Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

[Massman]

What mentality specifically Searching?

GC mentality as you posted, or something specific that I posted?

[searching]

The mentality of being committed more to your church then your family.  The church and all that it had going on was the first priority...over your children, your job, extended family, etc.

[Linda]

Are you suggesting unity is more important than doctrine?

If what Puff writes is true, then we are right back to the first excommunication. As I recall from reading Marching to Zion, Bill Taylor was the first elder to be excommunicated and the reason was that he taught that while unity was important, it should not be at the expense of truth.

Truth always trumps unity.

[Linda]

Where they were growing in God and made a lifelong committment to love these people, to serve God and pour out there lives unreservedly for God and people--why would that be bad???

Yes, that would be bad!

I will elaborate.

It is unwise to make a lifetime commitment to a particular church for the rest of your life for several reasons.

1) God may want you somewhere else.
2) False teachers may come in and deceive the flock.
3) It is unbiblical to make vows like that.

[Massman]

Oh, and one other thing that is wacky. If you are going to make the case for commitment to your local body for the rest of your life, what are you saying when you include that to be the entire movement. In other words, it seems to not be church shopping if you move from a GCM church in MN to one in Iowa. But, if you move from a GCM church in MN to a different church in MN you are violating the idea of unity. Can't you see the elitism here? Guess not.

Linda, you really don't understand where I am coming from.  Linda, you leaving does not make me think less of you.  God is a God of truly amazing grace.

You make some huge leaps when you accuse me of "Can't you see the elitism here? Guess not."

I am not talking about GC, your specific case, but about not painting your future with your past.

God may very well move someone, may very well.  He may very well have moved you.  

As you stated, "it seems to not be church shopping if you move from a GCM church in MN to one in Iowa."

It may very well be church shopping, or it may not.  The core of the issue did God truly send you.  Is in this sending, after licking your wounds you desire to surrender up all to Him.  

If someone runs to another GC church or any church to avoid God and some conflict that the core issue is there lack of willingness to offer there all to God.  They will not find what they are looking for at the next stop.

If they fought the fight, and could not come to peace and understanding, and leave with a heart to serve God and grow, who gives a crap what anyone thinks, you go girl!

(This is probably the case with you Linda!  I am not defending GC or accusing them here.)  There is only one way to love God, that is fully.  There is only one way to love people, fully.

My hope is that all healing would serve God and man wholeheartedly.

[Linda]

Massman,

What I'm talking about is what GCM believes, teaches, and practices.

My points are not directed at you so much as trying to point out to you what GCM believes and teaches.

Also, sometimes loving God fully means sticking your neck and your reputation out and speaking the truth.

Here's what I believe is the truth:

It is always wrong for men to insert themselves between people and God.

Only one man can do that. Jesus. It cost him a lot. He is our high priest. He is our mediator. He is the only reason that we can approach the throne of grace.

Anyone who believes otherwise is in error.

[namaste]

One of the things that consistently sent my bull**** meter into the red zone is the fact that "loyalty" and "unity" never seem to go both ways.

As I think we all recognize, people leave churches for darn good reasons.  It's a crying shame that GCx chooses to minimize the good reasons people leave by mocking them in sermons.  The last time I checked, Rick Whitney had the balls to put the outline of a sermon he shared on the subject on his website, wherein he patronized those who chose churches based on the quality of teaching and children's programs, but said that it's acceptable for someone to leave because the church appoints a woman as a leader.

The fact of the matter, is that it's quite reasonable for a church-goer to direct his attentions elsewhere if they desire more than a "kibbles 'n bits" of a sermon every week.  If the teaching is off (and most especially if the leadership won't address the error), the person should probably head for the hills.  For those of us with children, the availability and quality of appropriate children's programs is certainly a reasonable thing to consider when selecting a church.

The way in which GCx has systematically minimized the legitimate needs of a congregation through harping on themes of unity and loyalty is truly disgusting.

The GCx church we went to couldn't even get one or two (of hundreds!) of college students to take turns playing with the very young children so that their parents could enjoy the Sunday morning service, though you'd better believe that if the church needed the mommies and daddies to foot the bill/bring the food for a picnic, we were on speed dial.  

And if we leave, WE'RE the ones who are disloyal and lacking in unity?  I don't think so.  I think it's time that the high and mighty within GCx turn their fecal fingers around and point them back at themselves.

[Massman]

It certainly should go both ways, thank you Namaste.

[skewed_grace]

i respectfully request you to consider some of what you said:

"you don't stay in a place for the rest of your life out of a law-binding commitment, you stay there because naturally that's where you've invested your heart."

We invest out of obedience to God and his word.  There really is nothing natural about this.
posts.

Massman,

you've been in church almost as long as  i've been alive. so i apologize if my comment came off arrogant.

when we talk, we mainly rely on our personal experiences. so i think neither you nor i would have a whole lot of credibility if there were just you and me talking. however, this forum is a proof of the opposite. i swallowed my pride when i left the GCx church. i sucked it up and took it as a personal flaw in my character, but when i came across this forum, i was convinced that there is a pattern in what happens in the movement throughout the churches. then i started re-considering the reason i left. maybe it wasn't all me...and again, based on others' experience, it was NOT all me.

i agree there will always be opponents whenever somebody is undertaking something. but it's not consumer reviews of a just launched product, we are talking about people's lives. if there are flaws, they can't be swept under the rug, they have to be addressed.

also, when you say "we invest out of obedience to God and his word", it saddens me - because of obedience to God and his word, muslim extremists kill thousands of innocent, because of obedience to God and his word, christian cults committed heinous actions. so these are the points i want to make clear:
obedience to God has to be internalized, i.e. you have to understand and be somewhat at ease about it. Obedience to God isn't obedience to a law-enforcement agent. If you don't feel natural about obeying God during the entire course of your life, then there are some issues. I hate to use these weird "practical life" analogies, but i am so passionate about these issue that i will reduce myself to one  :wink:  i have my parents, and i love them and I try my best to obey them. BUT i can't say that my obedience comes solely from my responsibility to do so as their  child. i obey them because after being their son for a long time, it's become natural. my un-biased love to them has A LOT to do with this. if tomorrow they tell me that they somehow release me from doing so - i will still obey them, cuz it's a part me by now.

so in case i've gotten off track here (sorry for the long post), let me re-iterate my stance.

commitment to a local church is POSSIBLE and not elitist in and of itself; however, i do think that GCx churches (from my own experience and the impression of others i got on here) force this commitment as a hollow command. i PERSONALLY need time, sometimes a lot of time, to commit myself to something. so i won't commit for the sake of commitment. if that was true, then woe to all those who stop by at a  service on a sunday morning and don't commit themselves to that church for the rest of their lives

[Massman]

puff of purple smoke

No, not suggesting that unity is greater than doctrine.

My love for the brother causes me to accept him and be committed to him, regardless of differences.  And him to me.

The basis of this was not feelings, but obedience to God, especially in the midst of the disagreement.

The feelings are there now.

[Massman]

AgathaL'Orange

If God puts someone in your path in your church, that you naturally don't like, what do you do?

[skewed_grace]

Massman,
naturally disliking ONE person and naturally disliking an entire GROUP of persons united by the same principles are different things in my opinion...

[Linda]

My love for the brother causes me to accept him and be committed to him, regardless of differences.

Are you aware that GCM advocates shunning and in practice shuns those who   take stands that differ from theirs?

[Massman]

commitment to a local church is POSSIBLE and not elitist in and of itself; however, i do think that GCx churches (from my own experience and the impression of others i got on here) force this commitment as a hollow command. i PERSONALLY need time, sometimes a lot of time, to commit myself to something. so i won't commit for the sake of commitment. if that was true, then woe to all those who stop by at a service on a sunday morning and don't commit themselves to that church for the rest of their lives

Thanks for your thoughtful response brother.   Keep looking up, God will use you in huge ways.  Keep looking to the cross, never stop looking to the cross.  And work work it out here on earth.  If the Lord tarries, you can do much good for the kingdom.

[jehu]

Is it elitist to be committed to a church for life ?  (not just a gc church, any church?)

The suggestion by a church, or a de facto suggestion by its agents, that one commit to a church for life is an attempt to supercede and also thereby control the First Institution. Falling far short of ameliorating the societal strains on Marriage, as is often claimed, the designs which envision home churches in such a lofty place are by definition vain (as well as placing additional pressures on Man and Wife). There's no biblical precedent--the apostles were free to come and go as the spirit led them. This is just a doctrinal outgrowth of the shepherding fallacy and dominionist theology which taints religion by making it merely political. Even if an individual, both spirit-led and in wholesome self-interest, were to commit to a church as Husband, in my experienced opinion Great Commission is an abusive one and I do not recommend Him.