Solid Rock, etc., Columbus, 1980-87

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.

[khrysso]

[In light of the first response to the introduction that I had posted, I have concluded that my posting was not in keeping with the purpose of this forum, and so I have removed it.]

[theresearchpersona]

below is modified:

As you probably know (since you're biblically versed) you did indeed transgress both Christian doctrine and conduct (which merits biblical discipline, correction, and even disfellowshipping for unrepentance); furthermore biblical theology is about subjection to God, not reconciling yourself to Him: Calvinistic theology as you may have held a while, ought to have brought that to your mind.

Insofar as they overstepped biblical grounds, they were wrong; insofar as you might have actually been subjected to biblical discipline for immorality and violation of Biblical commands, they were correct: and from your story, you did merit it: what I am sorry (you) for is that (saying this on the basis of all evidence to the character, teachings, and practices of GC), if you were disciplined, I would fear it likely would have been mixed-up with their own presumed extra-biblical authority, (that's all I've ever seen GC do; throughout their whole history, from every testimony, from my own experiences and those about me while within it, from all the messages and teachings and conferences I've heard/been-to/read-about).

Please keep this in mind, regarding rule 1 of the forum rules (I'm not holding to the mere letter of that rule here), the "acting inappropriately reflects badly on the rest of the people posting here" part. From your post there are no identifiable theological problems that you listed, nor any indication of what was unbiblical, etc., just that you were, in fact, in rebellion, which attitude this quote shows seems current with you

I have particular antipathy to any suggestion of telling me what to do, offering me unsolicited advice, or instructing me. As was always the case during my GCI years, I do a lot of thinking and am probably way ahead of any "shoulds" anyone might try to throw at me. I will listen to testimony and to sharing, but not to instruction. As a freethinker, I reserve the right to determine what constitutes "teachability." And yeah, I know all about what Proverbs says about that.

and which the reason you left lends evidence of,

I left in August or so of 1987, I guess it was, in the throes of what was essentially the proverbial nervous breakdown, over my failure to reconcile my theology with my homosexuality. I was in love with my housemate. Furthermore, for seven years I had been continually looked over as leadership material, usually based on the proposition that I was "unteachable."

I for one, and I know others here, want the best for GC, for it to turn around, to grab hold and hold fast to Scripture as the grace from God that it is: what you just said does not sit with that, nor could I blame GC for taking any action with you if it did, and although its leadership selection and etc. are wholly unbiblical, it did well to pass over you: if being faithful to God's word, it is foolish to put anyone over others who are not qualified (something those here have been begging GC to subject itself to since that is true).

Also, don't take this as me trying to be a jerk to you, (please), (I'm being sincere here): I'm just trying to be very straightforward and unfluffy, and as for me to say this with having seen GC throw-around and abuse judgments of "unteachable", "unsubmissive", and others not according to biblical prescription, but at its own convenience, well, you sure do give much evidence that in your case they may have been able to rightly apply discipline if they did (in whatever manner it was done correctly); I'll qualify that statement with this, and that is I've never seen GC actually prosecute any of that in true biblical fashion, love, or with (apparent, or what is evident, as we can't see inside them) attitudes (again, what is apparent) that are biblical correct or upright: and often the aftermath of things, or what's available (since it's often hidden from others), turns out to confirm this from documents, teachings, behavior, etc..

That said, I cannot applaud your testimony here: you did not mention any real theological problems, anything unbiblical, etc., but rather the very things that are legitimate reasons for having Church discipline (though with GC how it usually goes about things is wrong, and how it typically abuses that feature of Church life, while also refusing to apply it when actually merited so long as the thing in question is not, necessarily, an inconvenience to them, at least generally).

as to this part:

I have particular antipathy to any suggestion of telling me what to do, offering me unsolicited advice, or instructing me. As was always the case during my GCI years, I do a lot of thinking and am probably way ahead of any "shoulds" anyone might try to throw at me. I will listen to testimony and to sharing, but not to instruction. As a freethinker, I reserve the right to determine what constitutes "teachability." And yeah, I know all about what Proverbs says about that.

Please be aware that this seems to confine what you want anybody to be allowed to say to you; is this about "don't say what I don't want to hear", or...? As for "teachability", you were in a self-professedly [neo]evangelical-protestant scripture-the-sole-basis-and-foundations-of-our-beliefs community, and therefore the definition of "teachability" ought be defined, in discussions of GC, to what is biblically valid, that is, what is Scripturally the definition (as opposed to the definition GC and others would eisegete into it, or misuse as the definition for their convenience) so as to be wholly fair and considerate of either party involved in a dispute, not subject to your whim "freethinker"; when you discuss things with others, you get to bow to them on certain points in truth just as much as they must do the same, in mutual respect insofar as possible for the truth: which is the interest here; I understand (from my and so many others' testimonies) the abuse of "teachability" that occurred, but again, from what you just posted, you do qualify for that label: however on your part, from what I've seen, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that they perhaps may not have handled things uprightly (though notice I'm not accusing GC in this either).

And qualifying those points on defining terms: in discussions with GC, the valid foundation and measure of their conduct and doctrines (and qualifications and/or misqualifications of terms) is Scripture (that's what they profess to hold to): therefore insofar as is possible, the definitions come from their use in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, their nuance in context, particular mening and use in the doctrinal-theological and/or socio-political communities to which the Scriptures' writings belonged when they utilized those terms, and where appropriate their legitimate (not convenient) use in English; please don't abuse terms, or else we could never get anywhere with this group, nor seek its (and its members') well-being.

[khrysso]

Thank you for that. I believe I misunderstood the purpose of this forum, and in light of what you've told me, I think it was inappropriate to post as I did.

I was not disciplined by the church. I left before I did anything shunworthy.

best regards

KHL

[theresearchpersona]

Just so you can get to know the purpose of these, the forums here are for people to post related to theology and practices, etc., in regards GC, the forum rules page states,

"Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, and the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology."

And suboordinate to that purpose (from rule 6),

"This is a site created by ex-GC'ers, designed primarily to serve those who have left the movement, and populated mostly with former members of the group.

And the whole little document is at

     Forum > Special Forums > Announcements, feedback, technical support > Forum rules

And thank you much for your humble reply.

[EverAStudent]

I am sorry I was not logged on to read khrysso's original post.  Trying to fill in the gaps from what is left of the conversation, I would add:

1) GC, at least in those days, was certainly not equipped to deal with people involved in sin at a loving or human level any more than they were equipped to accept diversity of opinion at more inconsequential levels (i.e. they swatted everyone with the same "shun-em" stick whenever they got nervous about individuals).

2) If khrysso is a professing born-again believer in Christ and involved in homosexual activity, that would present a problem in the eyes of any orthodox church (including the Eastern Orthodox Church -- hang in there Agatha, love 'ya!), and certainly in GC.

3) If khrysso is not a professing born-again believer in Christ, then I would favor him (if you are female, then sorry for the wrong personal pronoun) posting in one of the "off topic" forum areas and expressing his concerns with Christianity in general.  Such a discussion could be beneficial for all, if conducted in mutual respect and in accord with the forum rules.  After all, he did attend GC, and apparently (though I did not read the post) they were somewhat less than helpful.  Perhaps we can be of a bit more help, even if we hold an opposing view.

4) I agree that we all hope GC will reform, admitting to their pasts and casting away their improper doctrines and inappropriate behaviors. 

[EverAStudent]

Agatha, you crack me up!!!!!!  Never did I think that the EO would endorse practicing homosexuality.  I just wanted you to know that as brother/sister in Christ, even though our worship services are radically different in form and style, the essentials of the faith are more the same than not.  Further, I suspect that the EO and the SBC (my present church home) feel about the same with regard to needing to love all sinners, desiring them to help them find themselves in Christ.

Blessings.

[AgathaL'Orange]

I agree! 

[theresearchpersona]

Actually I just wanted to be really frank: I wasn't against Khrysso posting things here, just wanted to clarify some points; what evidence he brings fairly to the table regarding GC is to be heard...he was there.

One of the things I was troubled by, in posting, (not against posting), was that just presenting that information might come-off cold: but I also could not give concession to what he said, either, minus the qualifications giving him some benefit of doubt that he may have been "handled" improperly (and just to be clear, though the idea of being "handled" may not sound great, everyone has to handle everyone else); unfortunately stating things bare is usually taken that way: I would have preferred "in person" (a lot of communication comes from what is not explicitly stated too, although that's also subject to misinterpretation).

As stated above, though, actual problems related to GC theology/practice, which the forum rules state is the primary purpose of this forum, were not discussed, just that Khrysso was going in a different trajectory than GC and he walked-out: no actual protest of what was/not biblical was given; I also intended just to ask the guy (Khrysso is male, by the way, from what his post stated) to be quite fair with GC, and keep the evaluation within appropriate terms or framework: I certainly didn't hope that he'd actually remove the post, but that's all up to him too!

[G_Prince]

So khrysso is gay. Why does that invalidate his post, his experiences and his feelings? We are all humans; we all have our issues. I for one drink way too much… I’ve been to church hung-over and not too proud to admit it.

That being said, I am against the moral police swinging through this neighborhood. Come on. If we are all honest with ourselves we know we would all get busted. So let’s cut the crap. GCx ain’t perfect but neither are we. Do we have to be faultless to criticize? I sure hope not or it’s going to get awfully quite around here. Let he(or she) without sin make the first post.