What They Believe

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]

This is a very odd page.  Protecting reputations?  Really?  That seems strange for a church mission.  It's openly claiming to deceive people into thinking someone is better than he is in reality.   I think this is a very odd thing to list in "What We Believe".  I wish I would have seen this before we joined up.
http://www.walnutcreekcc.org/index.php/about/what_we_believe/

[Linda]

That is bizarre. Is that statement new? I defend the reputations of everyone I know no matter what church they go to or don't go to! Sometimes "defending a reputation" might mean telling a person to stop doing the thing that is giving them a bad reputation! I don't automatically defend people who are doing something bad, just because I know them. That wouldn't be right.

My assumption in reading this is they are going back to the old days of "not listening to a bad report". And by "bad report" they mean no one can say they disagree with faulty GC teaching and try to point out to others why it is bad.

Shortly after we left our GC church, I read something by John Piper that was very helpful. In it he specifically addresses what may be talked about publicly without falling under the heading of gossip or slander. I know I've quoted this before, but the thread is buried.

I don't mean you can't criticize President Bush without calling him on the phone first. And I don't mean you can't discuss my sermon, both negatively and positively, without coming to me. Public figures put themselves on the line and understand the everyone will have an opinion about what they say. That's okay. What I mean is when you know a brother or sister is in the grip of some sinful attitude or behavior, take the log out of your eye, and they go to them and try to help them with humble biblical counsel.

However, I believe most of the people posting here DID go to the pastors first and ask about the bad teaching. I totaled the hours we spent just talking with pastors and came up with 40. We started meeting in November of 2003, our last meeting was August 2005. It's not like we didn't try to point out their error privately and give them an opportunity to correct the bad teaching. The conclusion we came to was they didn't think it was bad teaching.

And what about the reputations of people who leave? Numerous talks speak of the disloyalty of those who leave the group. Being referred to as "disloyal" kind of tarnishes a reputation!

[lone gone]

What they wrote in their explanations about protecting a reputation sounds exactly like how Martin Luther explained the meaning of The Eighth Commandment.

    Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

What does this mean? - Answer.

    We should fear and love God that we may not deceitfully belie, betray, slander, or defame our neighbor, but defend him, [think and] speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything.


In my words, in the absence of any kind of evidence to the contrary, you should instead defend your neighbors reputation.   Luther knew that sinfulness will reveal itself.... if someone was doing wrong it would show up. A person does not go looking for sin in someone else... instead you can count on the fact that the sin will eventually be revealed.

Going on from there,  how would you like someone else to treat you?  Look for sin in you or not defend your good name?

I am not saying that WCCC is a Lutheran church,  but they may well have discovered that language and incorporated it into their publicly stated  beliefs.

[nelliepooh]

This statement isn't too new, I've read it before.  What bothers me about it is the part about seeking to change people.  That seams wrong, especially because the way they change people is to turn them into loyal to death members of their church not to change people to believers in Jesus.  It is good that they seek to expand the kingdom of God but their taret is not non christians, its the unchurched.  They seek people that have a christian background but don't know enough about the Word to argue against their teaching so that they hopefully never leave and become loyal members.  That is just wrong and not the way a church should function, people should want to stay because the leadership church help them grow closer to God and learn his Word.  

[AgathaL'Orange]

Well, we SHOULD defend against lies for sure, but about anyone.  The "loyally" part is probably the part that bothers me the most as it is clear that it is in a Rick Whitney loyalty kind of thing.  It's a circle the wagons, us vs.them, band of brothers, information control (bigtime information control) kind of thing.  And that actually isn't loyal at all.  All that does is get people behind someone without all the information and causes rifts between you and everyone outside of GC. It's "I don't need to know what he did, know what he said, know what he believes, etc. because 'I know his heart.'"  That, in my opinion, is not healthy and a breeding ground for letting people who need real help (therapy, theology training, parenting or marriage help) to not address things.  They have their own criteria for what growth means.  It's not good. 

[Linda]

Lone gone, don't you think it goes without saying that we should defend people who are falsely being accused of things? There are 10 commandments. Assuming they were going with the "Luther Interpretation" of the 8th commandment, I wonder why they don't mention any other commandments? We should also encourage people to not steal stuff or have affairs. I guess I wonder why they put specific things like that in a statement of purpose rather than just say something like "encourage each other to live holy lives." The emphasis on loyalty and the assumption that Christians are having their reputations damaged while not mentioning other more common sins is what makes it odd.

Also, they need a proof reader. Helpful tip: Change "more primarily" to just "primarily" or, perhaps, "more importantly" and "we have a physical, financial, or emotional needs" to "need" singular.

[newcreature]

This statement isn't too new, I've read it before.  What bothers me about it is the part about seeking to change people.

I agree... and they aren't just seeking to change people, they are striving to change people. The simple definition of that word means to exert strenuous effort to achieve something. It also means to struggle in opposition or fight vigorously with someone. In my opinion they have created an oxymoron by using the adverbs "gently" and humbly" to modify the verb strive.

That word also brings to mind what God said in Genesis 6:3a (NASV) right before He flooded the earth: "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever." (ruh roh! I guess striving to change someone has its limits.)

As I recall, striving was also the old King James word used when expositing on 2 Timothy 2:2ff in the GCI quest to reach the world and make every man an elder. In verse 5 the word is "compete" in the NASV and "striveth" in the KJV. Jim McCotter was very slick at twisting Bible verses to suit his purposes. I pray that WCCC hasn't adopted any of his "discipleship" methods.

[nelliepooh]

What were his methods?

[newcreature]

Here is the link that summarizes Jim’s erroneous methods:
http://gcxweb.org/Misc/WeaknessesPaper.aspx

I listed the main points at the end of my post.

The document is referred to as the “1991 Church Error Statement” but it contains the following title: “A STATEMENT RECOGNIZING EARLY ERRORS AND WEAKNESSES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GREAT COMMISSION ASSOCIATION OF CHURCHES”

I point to this paper as Jim’s methods because he started the GCI denomination and shepherded it for the better part of two decades. He considered himself to be a present-day Apostle Paul. Once he got Dennis and Herschel onboard with him, they laid the groundwork for the elders to voice their consent to apostleship at a national elders’ conference in DC during the mid 80s.

He used the book he wrote: "Leadership: Elders and Apostles" to indoctrinate everyone he could. The elders promoted it and sold it in every GCI church in the country. After Jim left, the book was taken out of print, but from what I can see from all the current problems addressed in this forum, the spirit of apostleship lives on at GCI. Here is the link to that book: http://gcxweb.org/Books/Leadership/

Here are the main errors listed in the Church Error Statement. Think of Jim and his discipleship methods for every one of them. (I added the parenthetical comments.):

I. PRIDEFUL ATTITUDE
1. Improper response to criticism.
2. An elitist attitude.

II. MISAPPLICATION OR MISINTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE
1. Failing to distinguish between a command, a principle, and a preference.
2. Authoritarian or insensitive leadership.
3. (Lack of) Direction, planning, and management.
4. (Erroneous, incorrect, and heavy-handed) Church discipline.
5. Lack of emphasis (and outright denigration) on formal education.
6. A belief that every man should become an elder (and that Jim and Dennis were apostles).

They are strangely silent in the paper about their position on present day apostles. Perhaps that was not considered an error after all. Therefore, when the pastors and national leaders ratified this document nearly 20 years ago, should we equate their national leaders to apostles? At least the Mormons are open and honest about their apostles.

[nelliepooh]

Pretty much beverything in that book deescribes the road to being a recognised person on staff or elder at wccc.  I never heard about modern day apostles, but I didn't stay long enough to be fully endoctrinated.  I need to do more reading to pull out his specific decipleship model and see how closely it fits to my experiences.

[newcreature]

Hi Nellie (* see note below),

Jim's book (Leadership: Elders and Apostles) and the 1991 Church Error Statement are good starting points. To get another view of the type of discipleship that was going on when Jim and Dennis were aggressively putting their plans into action, you can read the history compiled by Larry Pile. It contains copies of original "discipline" letters and quotes from those involved. I just began reading it for the first time this past week. Here is the link: http://gcxweb.org/Books/MarchingToZion/MTZ-Trouble.aspx

With their history of church disciplne to preserve the unity of the saints, it appears they had a one-verse hammer (excommunication) and saw every problem as a nail (faction). You can read documented occasions where they required Christians in the group to sign confessions (written by the leaders) and go back and seek out specific people whom they had "sinned against" in order to prove their repentance and prove themselves worthy of restoration. When those Christians refused to sign those letters, the leaders wrote and signed ex-communication letters and publicly defamed them. In some cases, they even had GCI church members sign the letters. You can read the specifics where a Christian woman had over 100+ signatures judging her and kicking her out without even hearing her side of the story. Another woman was ex-communicated for simply marrying her fiancé who had just been ex-communicated!

On top of that, the leaders completely went beyond their authority by extending the scope of their edicts to the universal church of Christ. In some cases they even went to other churches in the city where ex-communicated Christians had fled for refuge. The GCI leaders asked the pastors there to honor the GCx ex-communication. Fortunately, this abuse didn't spread beyond the GCx denomination as far as I know. Here are two paragraphs from one such letter. You can read the photo-copy of this original letter (and others) for yourself by going to the link above.

"Genuine repentance will be evidenced in confession of your sins to God and all those sinned against, humble submission to the elders in this disciplinary action, total cessation of causing any division in the universal and local bodies of Christ and sincere attempts to bring restoration of yourself and all others you’ve divided to Jim. This does not necessitate agreement with Jim on every point, but a refusal to cause “foolish controversies…strife and disputes” about Jim’s interpretations of scripture.

"To be restored you will have to demonstrate genuine repentance by making restitution for all wrongs done, by communicating with all whom you have divided from Jim in such a way that would take away all suspicion of him caused by you. All of this communication must be approved by the elders. All Christians are to have nothing to do with you, turn away from you, and keep away from you. Do not make any attempt to communicate with them."

If GCx applied the same standards of repentance and restoration to itself that it applied to others, it seems to me their "Statement of Errors and Weaknesses" would encompass a lot more specifics and a lot more restitution to the many people who they now confess to hurting.

Furthermore, shouldn't their teaching on apostleship also be listed as an error? That specific error is never mentioned or disavowed in their list of errors. 

Finally, I would expect many more signatures than just Dave Bovenmeyer's if all the elders and national leaders truly did ratify their document.

(* Note: I edited my post today to remove any elements of disdain and sarcasm. I initially wrote this after reading M2Z for the first time. The documented instances of GCx personal abuses and misuses of scripture was very sad and disturbing to me.)

[newcreature]

I need to do more reading to pull out his specific decipleship model and see how closely it fits to my experiences.

If you are interested, here is the link to part 3 of M2Z. It is Larry's analysis of GCI's distortion of a number of major Christian themes. http://gcxweb.org/Books/MarchingToZion/MTZ-Analysis.aspx

I did not detect a spirit of anger or bitterness on his part as he wrote his thoughtful perspective.

(Note: I, on the other hand, went back today and edited my previous post. After reading M2Z last week for the first time in my life, I was saddened and angered by all the misuse of scripture and abuse of authority that occured within GCx. It opened a lot of old wounds that I thought had healed. However, God patiently continues to love and heal, and in light of that, I removed the remnants of sarcasm and disdain that bubbled to the surface.)

Here are the main topics he addressed:

1. The “Team-Church”
2. Evangelism
3. Teaching
4. Strategy to Reach the World (utilitarian)
5. Discipleship (GCx spiritual hothouses)
6. Fellowship (utilitarian)
7. Church Authority and Disagreement
8. The “Laodicean Syndrome” and Sectarianism
9. Non-autonomous Autonomy
10. Crushed Spirits
11. A Faulty Hermeneutic
(A profound failure to exercise care in interpreting Scripture, particularly in distinguishing clearly between biblical commands, principles, and examples. In addition, Blitz teachers often failed to interpret the Word of God consistently within context.)
12. The Forgotten (Holy) Spirit
13. The Development of Heresy

[josieJ]

They are elitist. That is one of the things which was repented of in the weakness paper. John Meyer spoke at a pastor's conference about 5 years ago and it was on having children. He showed that if we multiplied at the right rate, while others in Christendom had less children, in just a few generations GC would have the majority population in Christianity. The application was that, "we (GC) are the remnant!"

He was told to apologize the next day and the message was taken down. I do not see this attitude changing in the movement, however. There is an elitist view. People boast that they evangelize more than other churches, but it is not effective evangelism. It is quick prayer and emotional!

For the record, even though a weakness paper came out in 1991, I was never made aware of it, nor were my peers who were still in the movement. It was only years later that I heard of it and it was in a boasting manner. The leader spoke of how much humility it took to produce such a paper and how no other groups in Christendom have done that. Yet, I would say that the church I attended, it was never repented of. I encourage all the young people to read the paper for themselves.
http://www.gccweb.org/assets/gccweb/weakness.pdf