Looking for Information

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.

[trusting in Him]

I'm sorry. That wasn't very clear. What I meant to say was that I do not know his reasons for leaving from him personally. He had been more involved in another ministry for a while and I was away from Des Moines for personal reasons when he left. I do know some of his reasons but as I didn't personally hear it from him, I am reluctant to share them. I was planning to ask him personally why he left in the near future as I have a lot of respect for him.

[trusting in Him]

I need to read what I post before I post it, or I'm going to need to keep clarifying things. The reason I have been planning to ask him personally is that I have a lot of respect for him and would like to know his reasons for leaving a fellowship/ church that he was so involved in.

[Linda]

Excellent idea to ask him. Thanks for clarifying. It speaks well of him that you have a lot of respect for him.

So he left the church, too?  It seems a little strange that an involved leader would be gone and there wouldn't have been a public explanation of why along with an introduction of the new leader. Generally when churches/groups have staffing changes, or leaders take on new leadership roles, the members of the congregation/group are informed as to the reasons. This is usually done publicly. It seems odd that it would require a private conversation for you to find out what's up and that the group wouldn't have taken 5 minutes to briefly tell the members about the change. (Perhaps they did while you were gone though.) Anyway, good idea to contact him.

[newcreature]

The reason I have been planning to ask him personally is that I have a lot of respect for him and would like to know his reasons for leaving a fellowship/ church that he was so involved in.

Thanks for your clarification, trusting in Him.

I am glad you and your parents trusted and respected your former leader. Perhaps you should give Steph his contact information along with your parents' information since she expressed an interest in gathering firsthand experience and information that is beneficial to her daughter.

[AgathaL'Orange]

I just noticed that Campus Fellowship took down all the messages.  Epicenter quit posting mid summer as well.  Wouldn't they want to leave that up so new members could more easily find out what the church teaches?

[trthskr]

Whoa, who told all the Alivers about this site all of a sudden?  Are you guys having damage control meetings about this post?

[Linda]

Is that why there are so many "guests" coming on all of a sudden?

One comment I would like to make is that my personal experience with GC church members was that in general they were nice people who, like me, cared about the Gospel being preached to the entire world, loved their families, and tried their best to live for God. Also, not all GC teaching is bad. Much is good.

That said, the difficulties I have are not with the leaders (many remain my friends), but with what is being taught. I worry that the great "fellowship" combined with some good teaching blocks out the very bad teaching that has damaged individuals, marriages and families.

God does not EVER ask anyone to give the controls of our life to a person other than Jesus Christ. A pastor who teaches that Hebrews 13:17 means you are to give the controls of your life to him is absolutely wrong and has a flawed understanding of the role of the Holy Spirit and the Lordship of Christ. That teaching should be dismissed as heresy and that pastor should repent of trying to take on for himself the position that only Jesus Christ rightly holds.

[Innerlight]

All of this back and forth is quite frankly, "creepy".  Gossip is talking about someone behind their back, and slander is accusing someone of something, when they are not there to defend themselves.  I recently left a church for various reasons, and moved on with my life.  When people ask, I give them the reason, and I would say the same thing if the people involved were in the room.  Maybe all of you would as well. 

Mark Darling and Brent Knox, from what I have read in these posts, appear to be all over the map:  in their interpetations, dress, scriptural knowedge and whether to home school or not to home school.. Type "getting your kids to Mars" into Google, and you'll see what I mean.

Personally, any church, whether it is Mpls (Evergreen) or Des Moines (Walnut Creek), that attracts this much controversy, and passion, has issues, period.  They have taken their eye off the ball, ie. Jesus Christ", and have become very self-focused.  I know people that attend both churches, and obviously, their fluff approach to deep spirtual things, but over-the-top enthusiasm for "seeker friendly" service, "dunking service", and at times mocking attitude towards traditional services, is coming from their leadership.    I've heard so many misquoted verses, or wrongly interpeted parables, that at times I can hardly believe it comes from a minister. 

I will continue to read, and comment from time to time, but please God will heal, and deal with those who preach his word wrongly. 

[Huldah]

I respectfully disagree. Slander is "a malicious, false, and defamatory statement." Truthfully pointing out errors of doctrine or practice doesn't fit that definition. Besides, it is the duty of the church to expose false teachings. If we who know the errors of GC don't warn others, who will?

[Innerlight]

You have confronted the leadership on this?  Stepping back from this, and looking from a safe distance, do you not find it odd that there is an entire website and forum devoted to this? 

Don't get me wrong...I agree with you, there is a lot that needs to be corrected, but is this how Jesus, Paul or Peter would have approached it?   

[Huldah]

I interacted with the leadership at various levels when I was there. My concerns were made light of. I witnessed the abuse of other members, and figured that further confrontation was pointless. There came a point when I knew that further interaction would simply lead to my undeserved excommunication, so I quietly left. Read "Marching to Zion" if you want to know how the leadership handles confrontation. I was there during that general time period, and was a very close friend of one of the "three sisters" described in that book. I've seen what happens to people who rebuke the leadership. It can be a devastating experience.

I don't know how Jesus would have handled this particular group, but his open rebuke of the Pharisees (white-washed sepulchres) comes to mind. For at least 30 years, the elders have been aware of legitimate criticism of their methods and teaching, yet they still haven't corrected those errors. The church of Christ has a mandate to expose false teaching. Again I ask: if we who know first-hand about the abuses and errors don't warn others, who will?

EDIT: I feel quite strongly about this because it's not an academic issue. Real and lasting damage is done by false teaching. Since the leadership is entrenched in its behavior, we owe it to other potential members to warn them.

[Innerlight]

I respect your feelings, and stand corrected.  Again, and as I mentioned in previous posts, I have close friends involved in this church, and am watching a transformation coming over them, which is very concerning to me.  Brainwashed is too strong of a word, but definitely some manipulation and mind (thought) control.  

Yes, continue to expose false teaching, and bring it into the public where all can see, but carefully consider it's Christ's church and bride, and according to the book of James, those who teach have a much greater responsibility (accountability).  Christ's light will expose the darkness.  

I found myself in a similar situation, where I felt excessive leadership control, a type of shunning, and the feeling of being manipulated, which caused me to leave a church after 14 years, and seek a new one.  I couldn't be happier.  Sometimes actions speak louder than words, and my departure has brought attention to this, and thank God, I haven't had to say anything in detail, causing further rifts.      

NEW:  HULDAH:  Interesting enough, and I feel this was Spirit Led, I listened to a sermon from a pastor at Fourth Baptist in Plymouth, MN, while in my car.  He spoke to many of these same things.  I really do stand corrected.  It is our responsibility to correct and rebuke bad teaching. 

Go to:  The Prophecy of Apostasy, link is below.  very eye opening

 http://www.fourthbaptist.org/sermonaudio.html?sa_sortby=popular&sa_action=

[nelliepooh]

Steph,
There have been a lot of posts to this website about Walnut Creek, if you use the search function you can read and find out what other people have had to say.  I have a family member that is on staff with this church and I was involved for a little while in college but left because of many reasons including the controlling nature of the messages and many of the other weaknesses of the church that stem from the origins of the GCM group.  In this group unity is preached time and time again to extremes, it is important for every member to be unified in their mindset down to not questioning authority and pressure to live in the same way as others have from the beginning.  I had many former friends in the church that quit speaking to me after I left the church probably because I don't have the nicest things to say about the group but it has especially made my relationship with my family member strained.  We grew up in an Evangelical Free Church in Minnesota and I am 200% sure that they are and were a Christian, we were baptized at the same time in our home church and were taught about what baptism means.  As this family member became more involved they went on missions trips and retreats and it was at one of these retreats that he decided that he wanted to become a pastor.  It was at this retreat that they were re-baptized and shortly after changed their major in college.  I have never been given a clear explanation as to why they decided to be baptized again as they were old enough to know what baptism was (we were all taught and I being younger would have been the one to not understand) and were definitely a Christian at the time.  I encouraged my family member to look into going to seminary if they wanted to become a pastor and that is where ultimately our relationship has become strained.  The church has its own way of bringing up leaders and it does not include encouraging seminary education.  I believe that the lack of seminary training among the pastors is the main reason that the GCM roots live on at this church.  I would make sure that your daughter knows the truth of the Word of God, one can certainly go to the church and not become affected, but many of the people that were in the same college class as me that did not leave the church are still very involved, but they also did see the flaws in the church but chose not to leave.  If your daughter continues to be involved I would just say to make sure to keep talking to her and ask about what she is learning at church.  If you hear a lot about being unified and planting your flag and dying at a church and not to date at all until you want to get married and also obedience to elders/leaders I would definitely talk to her more and if you feel the need to talk to the pastors as well, you wouldn't be the first.  It is not the church's job to teach people these things, it is the churches job to teach people what a life as a Christian means in terms of how we should treat one another, how grow in ones relationship with God and also to learn more about the Word of God.  They should also teach how to reach people for Christ and help new believers grow in their faith, and for those lead to ministry they should train in many more ways but I believe they should also encourage seminary for training in the Word. 

[newcreature]

I believe they should also encourage seminary for training in the Word.

Nellie, you provided some excellent personal examples and made many good points regarding many of the ongoing concerns about GCI.

In regards to seminary, you are putting yourselves in the GCI "cross-hairs" on that one. Their favorite term for seminaries used to be cemeteries, and I suspect that is still the sentiment. It is also telling that the only two seminary graduates that I knew about in GCI at the time were Mike Royal and Sam Lopez. Mike walked out in July 1980**, and Sam walked out about 20 years later, even though he was a national leader.

There seems to be an odd pride about that whole issue. The emphasis is on "first century" Christianity, and sitting at the feet of Jesus, and since he didn't endorse seminaries... ipso facto... neither does GCI. (Jesus didn't endorse TVs, cell phones, and cars either... maybe he was really Amish.)

It almost appears to be a GCI badge of honor to forego, downplay, and criticize seminaries. Yet strangely enough, when you look at some of their websites, they use the word "ordained" to apparently convey a sense of traditional meaning to the general public. Who typically walks in the door requesting to see a pastor's credentials when he says he is "ordained" on the website? (However, the IRS might be very interested in those credentials since they give terrific tax breaks to pastors.)

Since GCI teaches that elders, shepherds, pastors, and bishops are all equally inter-changeable titles for the same person, why don't they just call themselves Bishops on all their websites?  

** I corrected my original post thanks to Linda. See below.

[Innerlight]

But Jesus was the Word Incarnate, so I guess he didn't have to go to seminary

[AgathaL'Orange]

The fact is, people will not tell you the truth up front.  They don't think seminary is good.  They emphasize the church being above your career and even family.  They are controlling.  There is not discussion on things, the pastors decide unilaterally.  These are all things you can speak to the pastors on and they will reply in such a way as to downplay their beliefs and practices.  And then later, you find out they really do believe and practice what they said was *optional* and it really isn't *optional* if you want to really be a part of things.  But then you find that there are exceptions to every rule but only for *special* people.  

I wouldn't touch this group with a ten foot pole.  The idealism and sincerity of the people have been co-opted.  They have numerous locations and their goal is to cover the city.  If they do, I will move out of the city, I find the situation that aversive.

[Innerlight]

To me the difference is striking listening to a seminary trained theologian, Chuck Smith, Charles Stanley, Dr. McLachlen, Leith Anderson, etc....  and someone who is either copying a sermon they heard on the internet, or propogating a verse that has been taken out of context.  yep, dangerous stuff. 

would you go to a doctor, lawyer or mechanic who hasnt been trained? 

[Linda]

newcreature, Was Mike Royal excommunicated? I can't remember his story. I just know he wrote that letter.

Speaking of letters, Steph, you might want to read the letter that Bill Taylor wrote to Herschel Martindale in 1978, since Herschel is to be featured as a speaker at Campus Fellowship in October. Here's the link:
http://gcxweb.org/Misc/BillTaylorToHershel-11-21-1978.aspx

Bill Taylor was the first elder excommunicated from Great Commission. Basically, Bill said that unity is important, but truth matters more. Jim McCotter, the founder of the movement, taught that unity trumped truth.

For stating this, Bill Taylor was "excommunicated". He was an elder and was not allowed to give his side of the story to the church because for him to tell his side of things would be "slander". GC's definition of slander isn't false information told that defames someone, GC's definition is anything spoken by someone that makes them look bad.

For example, a friend asked me to listen to a sermon where the pastor told the congregation to give the controls of their life to their pastors. I told my friend that was absolutely unbiblical. According to GC thinking, I slandered that pastor. To challenge GC teaching is considered slander. There was a sermon given telling people not to go to this forum because it's slander. Here's the link:
http://gcxweb.org/Audio/SlanderAndTheChristian-05-07-2006.aspx

The amusing thing about that "sermon" is that in the message the man giving it totally slandered the people who started this forum. He even at one point says that he's not sure who started the web page, but that whoever did it had some sin issues and rather than repenting, got mad and started this site! Now, that's slander!

[newcreature]

newcreature, Was Mike Royal excommunicated? I can't remember his story. I just know he wrote that letter.

Linda, thank you very much for raising that question. When I got home from work tonight and read your question, I almost felt sick to my stomach. I hate to be the source of any inaccurate or misleading information in here or anywhere else. I went back and read Mike’s letter a second time and sure enough, I completely misspoke on that point. Mike was not “kicked out.” In his own words Mike said: “I left this group, referred to nationally as Great Commission International (GCI) and Great Commission Churches, in July, 1980.” http://gcxweb.org/Misc/MikeRoyal-06-28-1985.aspx

I truly appreciate your question which ultimately helped me see my error. I corrected my original post to say that Mike walked out. It is a little painful and a little embarrassing to realize I was living under the wrong impression for 30 years. I had always heard from GCI that Mike was “divisive” and a “slanderer” and that was why he was no longer with GCI. I took that as the truth, and equated it with all the other people who had been kicked out along the way. When I read Mike’s letter for the first time in my life earlier this week, his own words didn’t even register on that point. Error is such a deceptive thing.

However, thank God the truth sets us free; and thank you for pointing me to the truth.

Whenever I have read your posts, I have always come away with the sense that you are telling the truth, and that you have your facts straight. We would all do well in this forum to emulate your careful attention to detail and to the truth. Thanks for your consistent and kind example.

Tonight I also did something I have been putting off since joining this forum five months ago. I began reading “Marching to Zion” (M2Z). I have always been under the impression that it was full of slander and lies, and that it was written by men who were hell-bent on destroying GCI. I wasn’t interested in reading that type of material, life is troubling enough sometimes. But since I was already open to further correction tonight, I decided to see if what I had been told (and what I had parroted to others) was true or not.

My starting point was obvious for me: Find out the circumstances around Mike Royal’s departure. Amazingly, it can be corroborated by eyewitnesses in a group setting. And I skimmed ahead and saw that many other encounters have eyewitnesses that I was never aware of. Mike’s departure is in the following section of M2Z if anyone cares to read his side of the story: http://gcxweb.org/Books/MarchingToZion/MTZ-ContinuingSaga.aspx

I generally give the benefit of the doubt to my friends and people I respect, but I still don't believe everything I hear just because someone I trusted told me so. However, for years I have failed to heed Proverbs 18:17 in this case: “The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him.” Tonight I began to listen to the other side of the story.

Thanks again, Linda.

[Linda]

Thanks for the link. Now I remember reading the story in M2Z. Larry Pile sent it to us in March of 2005, so it's been a while since I read it cover to cover. It was in the mid-90's that we first started hearing the lifetime commitment to Great Commission teaching that we started to Google the words "Great Commission" and "cults". We honestly didn't expect to find anything. We were sickened to find the links on the Rick Ross site and Wellspring. This forum and all the info in the gcx library was not available.

I know Steph started this thread looking for information on the Des Moines Alive group. I vaguely remember reading a blog post that mentioned the local Des Moines TV station had done an investigative piece on Campus Fellowship. I thought it was referred to as "The Drake Cult". Did I dream that? Or, does anyone remember what station did it and what they said?

Steph, I really can't emphasize enough to you the unusual practice of asking for a lifetime commitment to the group and obedience to elders. Today I listened to a message I hadn't listened to for 5 years. It was called Fanning the Flame and was given to the gathered group of all GC churches in the Twin Cities in February of 2005. The speaker sits on the board of Great Commission and is the founder of Faithwalkers, so all students who attend that conference will sit at his feet and the feet of others who go way back to the days of McCotter and will hear lifetime commitment talk.

It's long so I'll put excerpts of it in a separate post.