Tucker Carlson and the Protest in front of his house.

I do not now, nor have I ever viewed GCx leaders as "enemies" to be destroyed.

I disagree profoundly with some (not all) of their teaching and practice, there is not one ECC person I would not sit down and have a meal with to talk about theology, or family, or anything else. (I might want to meet in the broad daylight and have witnesses present, in some cases.)

This purpose of this forum is to serve as a platform for discussing problems we have had in our GCx experience and to challenge the teaching and practices of GCx. A pastor should be able to defend his theology in a Scriptural, logical, rational manner and not resort to calling people names or gaining sympathy by saying things like, "You can't believe what people are saying about me on the Internet."

Really, what are people saying about you on the Internet? Is there any truth to those things? Are they challenging your theology? Well, by all means, explain and defend your theology.

Are they accusing you of wrong doing? Well, by all means, if you didn't do what you are being accused of, defend yourself. Don't send your family and friends out to do your job. Be a man. Speak the truth.

If you are a pastor who knows the truth, don't sit idly back and waste money by hiring an investigative attorney when you know full well the situation in question happened and you did nothing about it because you couldn't seem to manage it because of your personality type while preaching sermons against the accusers.

To strongly disagree with someone does not equate to bitterness. It could, but to make assumptions about people's motives or character is a very unwise and unhelpful thing to do.

Love and grace does not mean tolerating wrong or immoral things.

Likewise, confronting wrong things does not mean a person is bitter.

G. K. Chesterton said: "There is a thought that stops thought. That is the only thought that ought to be stopped.”

There are many ways to stop thought and a lot of them have been tried by those defending GCx.

Certainly the past few months have shown that. Mark Darling defenders tried a lot of them.

They suggested we be sued.

They called us liars.

They shamed us for time spent on this forum telling of our experiences and warning others.

They suggested that challenging the theology of Mark Darling was a vicious attack.

In private, they told people we were bitter (I have first hand knowledge of this.)

They posted things like: "Jesus fashioned a whip to loudly and violently drive out the thieves defiling his father's house - I believe I have a Biblical precedent to forcefully defend my father the same way."

Now, did I think Jeromy was saying he was going to come to my house and commit an act of violence? I was honestly conflicted on that, but my assumption was probably not. However, there were some pretty radical defenders of Mark and I worried that some might feel inspired by Jeromy's rhetoric...much like the Antifa people were inspired to threaten Tucker Carlson.

We were careful to turn on our outdoor lights, make sure our doors were locked day and night, and had a plan of action to take should someone come to our door. It's scary out there when people react with emotion as opposed to debating ideas.

All these above are attempts to shut down thought and/or discredit those who challenge GCx. In a way resorting to bullying shows that they are unable to defend their teaching and practices, but it is frightening when people mob together with emotion and even find virtue in attacking the person and not the idea.