The Power Idol

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]

“During my college years I knew a man, before professing faith in Christ, was a notorious womanizer. James’ pattern was to seduce a woman and…lose interest and move on. When he embraced Christianity he quickly renounced his sexual escapades. He became active in Christian ministry. However, his deep idol did not change. In every class or study, James was argumentative and dominating. In every meeting he had to be the leader, even if he was not designated to be so. He was abrasive and harsh with skeptics when talking to them about his new found faith.

Eventually it became clear that his meaning and value had not shifted to Christ, but was still based in having power over others. That is what made him feel alive. The reason James wanted to have sex with those women was not because he was attracted to them, but because he was seeking the power of knowing he could sleep with them if he wanted to. Once he achieved that power, he lost interest in them. The reason he wanted to be in Christian ministry was not because he was attracted to serving God and others, but to the power of knowing he was right, that he had the truth. His power idol took a sexual form, and then a religious one. It hid itself well.

Idols of power, then, are not only for the powerful. You can pursue power in small, petty ways, by becoming a local neighborhood bully or a low level bureaucrat who bosses around the few people in the field of his authority.”

From Timothy Keller’s – Counterfeit Gods- pages 111-112 Dutton Publishing 2009

Got this Keller quote from Terry. I find it extremely interesting.

One reason is that I was thinking the other day about how many GC pastor testimonies (on tape and a matter of public record, by the way) involve the pastors admitting to promiscuity prior to their conversion. When thinking about that, I have always viewed their commitment to GC for life with some compassion. After all, this is the group that told them about Christ and his power to forgive their past sin. What seemed to follow was a misplaced commitment to the group, somehow thinking the group saved them from their sin.

I find this quote thought provoking. Is promiscuity a power idol and not a sex idol? I had never attended a church where so many pastors, by public admission, had so much promiscuity in their past.

[GodisFaithful]

Linda,

Since we are talking about power and authority and the abuse of such, is this post relevant for the current predicament of Evergreen Church?

A question I have is: why do we have to know so much about the private sexual stuff in pastors and their wives? Why do we even know these things? And why do they need to probe to find that stuff out about their peeps? I mean, it is one thing if someone comes to a trusted leader or friend and needs to get something off their chest and in confidentiality get some help.

There is a great family organization out there and a woman shared something so powerful that she shared with her girls. They had read The Secret Garden when they were young. And when her girls got older and ready to marry, she told them that the sexual aspect of their marriage is like the secret garden. You close the bedroom door and all the secrets and good things and pleasure that they share is for them alone. That is what makes it so special and precious. That is why it is called intimacy, right? And God created it and made it to be good and PRIVATE.

We see, in the current Evergreen difficulty, that abuse of power can lead to some weird stuff in the realm of sexuality.

[OneOfMany]

“During my college years I knew a man, before professing faith in Christ, was a notorious womanizer. James’ pattern was to seduce a woman and…lose interest and move on. When he embraced Christianity he quickly renounced his sexual escapades. He became active in Christian ministry. However, his deep idol did not change. In every class or study, James was argumentative and dominating. In every meeting he had to be the leader, even if he was not designated to be so. He was abrasive and harsh with skeptics when talking to them about his new found faith.

Eventually it became clear that his meaning and value had not shifted to Christ, but was still based in having power over others. That is what made him feel alive. The reason James wanted to have sex with those women was not because he was attracted to them, but because he was seeking the power of knowing he could sleep with them if he wanted to. Once he achieved that power, he lost interest in them. The reason he wanted to be in Christian ministry was not because he was attracted to serving God and others, but to the power of knowing he was right, that he had the truth. His power idol took a sexual form, and then a religious one. It hid itself well.

Idols of power, then, are not only for the powerful. You can pursue power in small, petty ways, by becoming a local neighborhood bully or a low level bureaucrat who bosses around the few people in the field of his authority.”

From Timothy Keller’s – Counterfeit Gods- pages 111-112 Dutton Publishing 2009

Got this Keller quote from Terry. I find it extremely interesting.

One reason is that I was thinking the other day about how many GC pastor testimonies (on tape and a matter of public record, by the way) involve the pastors admitting to promiscuity prior to their conversion. When thinking about that, I have always viewed their commitment to GC for life with some compassion. After all, this is the group that told them about Christ and his power to forgive their past sin. What seemed to follow was a misplaced commitment to the group, somehow thinking the group saved them from their sin.

I find this quote thought provoking. Is promiscuity a power idol and not a sex idol? I had never attended a church where so many pastors, by public admission, had so much promiscuity in their past.

This makes a lot of sense. Transferring from one type of addiction to another is very common. The problem is not the manifestation of the problem, yet we often see the manifestation as the problem. So someone addicted to pornography or promiscuity (which is the manifestation) might come to see the manifestation as sin without recognizing that they crave power. Not recognizing the desire for power they renounce pornography and take replace it with another method of experiencing powerful.

Being a pastor has got to be one of the most powerful experiences of power that there is. You are on stage with an audience giving you their attention. You can use your words and music and lights to lead them to cry, laugh, smile and so much more. They tell you things that feed your ego such as how much your words have helped or changed them or what a great sermon that was. You can claim to save souls should you be so brazen as to take credit for what only God can do.  Daily feeding of the ego and of experiencing power in other people's lives. Wow. The ramifications are scary when those who are not humbly submitting themselves under God decide to lead a church.

[PietWowo]

I think that would make a lot of sense that a lot of GCx pastors would have a promiscuous past before getting saved. I think the reason for this is because GCx is very evangelistic in nature. So, they see people get saved as college students and most college students are promiscuous. Then there is an encouragement for these people to become leaders. Thus that's what you get. If you read Titus chapter 1, you'll see that there in Crete, they all were lazy beasts, gluttons, etc.... But Paul send Titus to Crete to raise up leaders, who had obviously changed.

Whereas in other churches, you'll have more young people who have grown up in the church and they haven't had that past. Then if they decide to become pastors or leaders, then they won't have that in their past. Because most churches are not very evangelistic.

[OneOfMany]

I think that would make a lot of sense that a lot of GCx pastors would have a promiscuous past before getting saved. I think the reason for this is because GCx is very evangelistic in nature. So, they see people get saved as college students and most college students are promiscuous. Then there is an encouragement for these people to become leaders. Thus that's what you get. If you read Titus chapter 1, you'll see that there in Crete, they all were lazy beasts, gluttons, etc.... But Paul send Titus to Crete to raise up leaders, who had obviously changed.

Whereas in other churches, you'll have more young people who have grown up in the church and they haven't had that past. Then if they decide to become pastors or leaders, then they won't have that in their past. Because most churches are not very evangelistic.

First of all, most college students are NOT promiscuous. There is a lot of danger to promiscuity therefore a lot of college students take a careful approach to sex so that they do not become ill and jeopardize their dreams.

Second it is not true that most churches are not very evangelistic. It is a GCM myth that they do it better. Better is not turning services into performances that entertain non believers so that they return. Better is not love bombing new people so that they think they have a community of people to be a part of. Better is not claiming numbers in pride rather than allow the Holy Spirit to reach people as they hear the word of God.

I can see through your posts that you are trying to subtly defend Evergreen and deny the seriousness of what Mark Darling and other leaders have done. It won't work here. Our eyes are wide open now to the manipulative ways Evergreen used so that we would give a pass to the sinful and unbiblical behaviors that are commonly practiced at Evergreen and the Rock.

[PietWowo]

I think that would make a lot of sense that a lot of GCx pastors would have a promiscuous past before getting saved. I think the reason for this is because GCx is very evangelistic in nature. So, they see people get saved as college students and most college students are promiscuous. Then there is an encouragement for these people to become leaders. Thus that's what you get. If you read Titus chapter 1, you'll see that there in Crete, they all were lazy beasts, gluttons, etc.... But Paul send Titus to Crete to raise up leaders, who had obviously changed.

Whereas in other churches, you'll have more young people who have grown up in the church and they haven't had that past. Then if they decide to become pastors or leaders, then they won't have that in their past. Because most churches are not very evangelistic.

First of all, most college students are NOT promiscuous. There is a lot of danger to promiscuity therefore a lot of college students take a careful approach to sex so that they do not become ill and jeopardize their dreams.

Second it is not true that most churches are not very evangelistic. It is a GCM myth that they do it better. Better is not turning services into performances that entertain non believers so that they return. Better is not love bombing new people so that they think they have a community of people to be a part of. Better is not claiming numbers in pride rather than allow the Holy Spirit to reach people as they hear the word of God.

I can see through your posts that you are trying to subtly defend Evergreen and deny the seriousness of what Mark Darling and other leaders have done. It won't work here. Our eyes are wide open now to the manipulative ways Evergreen used so that we would give a pass to the sinful and unbiblical behaviors that are commonly practiced at Evergreen and the Rock.

Really??? I've met a lot of college students. Working at a University and then living in a college town.... I would rate that most College students have sex outside of marriage.

I agree about not turning services into performances.... The Bible doesn't teach that. Jesus never did that. That's an American consumerist mentality. It's not in the Scriptures. Lots of churches do it, but it leaves people empty.

Never heard of love bombing.... If you are talking about manipulating, then yes, that's flattering... See last verse of Proverbs 26.

I am not defending what Mark Darling did or did not do.... I am just saying that I don't know.... And I would encourage people to not jump to conclusions. What I have heard Mark Darling did would be indefensible, but I have not seen this confirmed.

[OneOfMany]

I think that would make a lot of sense that a lot of GCx pastors would have a promiscuous past before getting saved. I think the reason for this is because GCx is very evangelistic in nature. So, they see people get saved as college students and most college students are promiscuous. Then there is an encouragement for these people to become leaders. Thus that's what you get. If you read Titus chapter 1, you'll see that there in Crete, they all were lazy beasts, gluttons, etc.... But Paul send Titus to Crete to raise up leaders, who had obviously changed.

Whereas in other churches, you'll have more young people who have grown up in the church and they haven't had that past. Then if they decide to become pastors or leaders, then they won't have that in their past. Because most churches are not very evangelistic.

First of all, most college students are NOT promiscuous. There is a lot of danger to promiscuity therefore a lot of college students take a careful approach to sex so that they do not become ill and jeopardize their dreams.

Second it is not true that most churches are not very evangelistic. It is a GCM myth that they do it better. Better is not turning services into performances that entertain non believers so that they return. Better is not love bombing new people so that they think they have a community of people to be a part of. Better is not claiming numbers in pride rather than allow the Holy Spirit to reach people as they hear the word of God.

I can see through your posts that you are trying to subtly defend Evergreen and deny the seriousness of what Mark Darling and other leaders have done. It won't work here. Our eyes are wide open now to the manipulative ways Evergreen used so that we would give a pass to the sinful and unbiblical behaviors that are commonly practiced at Evergreen and the Rock.

Really??? I've met a lot of college students. Working at a University and then living in a college town.... I would rate that most College students have sex outside of marriage.

I agree about not turning services into performances.... The Bible doesn't teach that. Jesus never did that. That's an American consumerist mentality. It's not in the Scriptures. Lots of churches do it, but it leaves people empty.

Never heard of love bombing.... If you are talking about manipulating, then yes, that's flattering... See last verse of Proverbs 26.

I am not defending what Mark Darling did or did not do.... I am just saying that I don't know.... And I would encourage people to not jump to conclusions. What I have heard Mark Darling did would be indefensible, but I have not seen this confirmed.

I don't know what you mean that what Mark Darling is not confirmed. Everygreen hired its own investigator that has confirmed that Mark Darling did indeed cross healthy sexual boundaries. There are numerous witnesses. What more do you need?

[PietWowo]

I think that would make a lot of sense that a lot of GCx pastors would have a promiscuous past before getting saved. I think the reason for this is because GCx is very evangelistic in nature. So, they see people get saved as college students and most college students are promiscuous. Then there is an encouragement for these people to become leaders. Thus that's what you get. If you read Titus chapter 1, you'll see that there in Crete, they all were lazy beasts, gluttons, etc.... But Paul send Titus to Crete to raise up leaders, who had obviously changed.

Whereas in other churches, you'll have more young people who have grown up in the church and they haven't had that past. Then if they decide to become pastors or leaders, then they won't have that in their past. Because most churches are not very evangelistic.

First of all, most college students are NOT promiscuous. There is a lot of danger to promiscuity therefore a lot of college students take a careful approach to sex so that they do not become ill and jeopardize their dreams.

Second it is not true that most churches are not very evangelistic. It is a GCM myth that they do it better. Better is not turning services into performances that entertain non believers so that they return. Better is not love bombing new people so that they think they have a community of people to be a part of. Better is not claiming numbers in pride rather than allow the Holy Spirit to reach people as they hear the word of God.

I can see through your posts that you are trying to subtly defend Evergreen and deny the seriousness of what Mark Darling and other leaders have done. It won't work here. Our eyes are wide open now to the manipulative ways Evergreen used so that we would give a pass to the sinful and unbiblical behaviors that are commonly practiced at Evergreen and the Rock.

Really??? I've met a lot of college students. Working at a University and then living in a college town.... I would rate that most College students have sex outside of marriage.

I agree about not turning services into performances.... The Bible doesn't teach that. Jesus never did that. That's an American consumerist mentality. It's not in the Scriptures. Lots of churches do it, but it leaves people empty.

Never heard of love bombing.... If you are talking about manipulating, then yes, that's flattering... See last verse of Proverbs 26.

I am not defending what Mark Darling did or did not do.... I am just saying that I don't know.... And I would encourage people to not jump to conclusions. What I have heard Mark Darling did would be indefensible, but I have not seen this confirmed.

I don't know what you mean that what Mark Darling is not confirmed. Everygreen hired its own investigator that has confirmed that Mark Darling did indeed cross healthy sexual boundaries. There are numerous witnesses. What more do you need?

Ok, let's just assume that that's true...  He crossed healthy sexual boundaries....

This reminds me of when the pharisees brought a woman to Jesus who was caught in the act of adultery. He started writing in the sand (a reference to the Old Testament) and said "Let him who is without sin throw the first stone." They all left and he told her to go and sin no more.

[OneOfMany]

I think that would make a lot of sense that a lot of GCx pastors would have a promiscuous past before getting saved. I think the reason for this is because GCx is very evangelistic in nature. So, they see people get saved as college students and most college students are promiscuous. Then there is an encouragement for these people to become leaders. Thus that's what you get. If you read Titus chapter 1, you'll see that there in Crete, they all were lazy beasts, gluttons, etc.... But Paul send Titus to Crete to raise up leaders, who had obviously changed.

Whereas in other churches, you'll have more young people who have grown up in the church and they haven't had that past. Then if they decide to become pastors or leaders, then they won't have that in their past. Because most churches are not very evangelistic.

First of all, most college students are NOT promiscuous. There is a lot of danger to promiscuity therefore a lot of college students take a careful approach to sex so that they do not become ill and jeopardize their dreams.

Second it is not true that most churches are not very evangelistic. It is a GCM myth that they do it better. Better is not turning services into performances that entertain non believers so that they return. Better is not love bombing new people so that they think they have a community of people to be a part of. Better is not claiming numbers in pride rather than allow the Holy Spirit to reach people as they hear the word of God.

I can see through your posts that you are trying to subtly defend Evergreen and deny the seriousness of what Mark Darling and other leaders have done. It won't work here. Our eyes are wide open now to the manipulative ways Evergreen used so that we would give a pass to the sinful and unbiblical behaviors that are commonly practiced at Evergreen and the Rock.

Really??? I've met a lot of college students. Working at a University and then living in a college town.... I would rate that most College students have sex outside of marriage.

I agree about not turning services into performances.... The Bible doesn't teach that. Jesus never did that. That's an American consumerist mentality. It's not in the Scriptures. Lots of churches do it, but it leaves people empty.

Never heard of love bombing.... If you are talking about manipulating, then yes, that's flattering... See last verse of Proverbs 26.

I am not defending what Mark Darling did or did not do.... I am just saying that I don't know.... And I would encourage people to not jump to conclusions. What I have heard Mark Darling did would be indefensible, but I have not seen this confirmed.

I don't know what you mean that what Mark Darling is not confirmed. Everygreen hired its own investigator that has confirmed that Mark Darling did indeed cross healthy sexual boundaries. There are numerous witnesses. What more do you need?

Ok, let's just assume that that's true...  He crossed healthy sexual boundaries....

This reminds me of when the pharisees brought a woman to Jesus who was caught in the act of adultery. He started writing in the sand (a reference to the Old Testament) and said "Let him who is without sin throw the first stone." They all left and he told her to go and sin no more.

Hold on there!! Mark is the one who is in a position of power!! He has been found to be an unrepentant serial abuser using his position of authority to take advantage of those under him. He is not the woman at the well! You got this wrong!

[Rebel in a Good Way]

PeitWowo, in a movement that teaches submissison and obedience to pastors, it is especially important that they do not "cross healthy sexual boundaries."  I mean, no one should do that.  But when a member is specifically taught their pastors have legit, God-given authority over them (as individuals, not just authority over the institution of the church) and they are to obey, it is especially egregious for a pastor to do so. He also did it to multiple women over a long period of time.  I'm not sure why you seem to be minimizing his verified misconduct? 

Perhaps before you judge us for "casting the first stone" you should go back and read the months and months of dialogue we have had about this issue.  To jump on the forum and insinuate that we are "casting the first stone" because we believe in accountability is misguided at best.

[PietWowo]

I think that would make a lot of sense that a lot of GCx pastors would have a promiscuous past before getting saved. I think the reason for this is because GCx is very evangelistic in nature. So, they see people get saved as college students and most college students are promiscuous. Then there is an encouragement for these people to become leaders. Thus that's what you get. If you read Titus chapter 1, you'll see that there in Crete, they all were lazy beasts, gluttons, etc.... But Paul send Titus to Crete to raise up leaders, who had obviously changed.

Whereas in other churches, you'll have more young people who have grown up in the church and they haven't had that past. Then if they decide to become pastors or leaders, then they won't have that in their past. Because most churches are not very evangelistic.

First of all, most college students are NOT promiscuous. There is a lot of danger to promiscuity therefore a lot of college students take a careful approach to sex so that they do not become ill and jeopardize their dreams.

Second it is not true that most churches are not very evangelistic. It is a GCM myth that they do it better. Better is not turning services into performances that entertain non believers so that they return. Better is not love bombing new people so that they think they have a community of people to be a part of. Better is not claiming numbers in pride rather than allow the Holy Spirit to reach people as they hear the word of God.

I can see through your posts that you are trying to subtly defend Evergreen and deny the seriousness of what Mark Darling and other leaders have done. It won't work here. Our eyes are wide open now to the manipulative ways Evergreen used so that we would give a pass to the sinful and unbiblical behaviors that are commonly practiced at Evergreen and the Rock.

Really??? I've met a lot of college students. Working at a University and then living in a college town.... I would rate that most College students have sex outside of marriage.

I agree about not turning services into performances.... The Bible doesn't teach that. Jesus never did that. That's an American consumerist mentality. It's not in the Scriptures. Lots of churches do it, but it leaves people empty.

Never heard of love bombing.... If you are talking about manipulating, then yes, that's flattering... See last verse of Proverbs 26.

I am not defending what Mark Darling did or did not do.... I am just saying that I don't know.... And I would encourage people to not jump to conclusions. What I have heard Mark Darling did would be indefensible, but I have not seen this confirmed.

I don't know what you mean that what Mark Darling is not confirmed. Everygreen hired its own investigator that has confirmed that Mark Darling did indeed cross healthy sexual boundaries. There are numerous witnesses. What more do you need?

Ok, let's just assume that that's true...  He crossed healthy sexual boundaries....

This reminds me of when the pharisees brought a woman to Jesus who was caught in the act of adultery. He started writing in the sand (a reference to the Old Testament) and said "Let him who is without sin throw the first stone." They all left and he told her to go and sin no more.

Hold on there!! Mark is the one who is in a position of power!! He has been found to be an unrepentant serial abuser using his position of authority to take advantage of those under him. He is not the woman at the well! You got this wrong!

I'm not talking about the woman at the well. I'm talking about the woman caught in adultery. Then Jesus started writing on the sand. (See Jeremiah 17:13 to see how the Jewish accusers took this)  So, one by one, they left Christ, starting with the oldest. (Very Jewish)  They knew Christ showed them to be guilty too. You can read this story in John 8.

The woman at the well story you can find in John 4. She also had problems, since you brought her up. She had had many husbands. She was an adulterer.

The big question is whether Mark is an unrepentant person, or not.  BTW, do you know Mark?

[Huldah]

I'm not talking about the woman at the well. I'm talking about the woman caught in adultery. Then Jesus started writing on the sand. (See Jeremiah 17:13 to see how the Jewish accusers took this)  So, one by one, they left Christ, starting with the oldest. (Very Jewish)  They knew Christ showed them to be guilty too. You can read this story in John 8.

The woman at the well story you can find in John 4. She also had problems, since you brought her up. She had had many husbands. She was an adulterer.

The big question is whether Mark is an unrepentant person, or not.  BTW, do you know Mark?

It's not a one-for-one comparison. The woman at the well and the woman caught in adultery were probably not true believers at the time they first encountered Jesus, and they certainly had not been preachers of the gospel for years before embarking on their sexual sins.

Has Mark repented? I don't know him and I certainly don't know his heart. I believe that, at minimum, a truly repentant person would admit his guilt and apologize to his victims. The investigation is over. Mark is free to speak now. But for that matter, he was free to speak at any time, if he had wanted to say, "Stop the charade. I did it. I'm sorry."

[Rebel in a Good Way]

John 4 does not say that the woman at the well was an adulterer.  She was likely someone who had suffered much, either having lost husbands to death or having been abandoned.  The fact that her voice had such influence in her town that people would receive and believe what she said implies that she was a person of good repute.  Jesus also did not tell her to "go and sin no more" as he did to the adulterous woman.  No need to add to the narrative. 

[PietWowo]

John 4 does not say that the woman at the well was an adulterer.  She was likely someone who had suffered much, either having lost husbands to death or having been abandoned.  The fact that her voice had such influence in her town that people would receive and believe what she said implies that she was a person of good repute.  Jesus also did not tell her to "go and sin no more" as he did to the adulterous woman.  No need to add to the narrative. 

Well, I like how you don't want to add to the Scriptures. But Christ said: "And the one you're with right now is not your husband...."  I take that as that she was living with a man.... that she was not married to.