For our “Things That Make You Go Hmmm” file, here’s an excerpt from a post over at The Wartburg Watch (you can read the full article here):
When Joshua Harris assumed the position of Senior Pastor of CLC in 2004, C.J. Mahaney began an extensive campaign to advance SGM full-time. Since 2004, Mahaney has formed some important alliances with leaders of the reformed movement. Now C.J. shares the stage at various conferences with John Piper, Al Mohler, Mark Driscoll, Ligon Duncan, Mark Dever, and other Calvinists.
How did this “success story” happen? As far as we can determine, C.J. Mahaney was not well known until the release of his book Humility: True Greatness in 2005 and the re-release of Living the Cross Centered Life in 2006. Mahaney seems to have become an overnight success, although it was at least 20 years in the making.
How did C.J. Mahaney become so popular among reformed Christians? We believe C.J.’s secret to success is that he has friends in high places. Here’s what we speculate… We believe his recognition among the “Reformed Big Dogs” began when he befriended Mark Dever, Senior Pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, in Washington, D.C. (a church not far from Gaithersburg where CLC is located). C.J. interviewed Mark Dever for 9Marks (a Mark Dever ministry) a couple years ago, and they established during that recorded conversation that they have known each other for 10 years. We believe that conversation took place in 2008. Ten years prior to that time would be have been 1998 — the year Mahaney and Tomczak parted ways. Hmmm……..
Mark Dever is directly connected with Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS) where he serves as a trustee. Again, mere speculation on our part, but we believe Mark introduced C.J. to Al Mohler fairly early in the Mahaney/Dever friendship because we have discovered that C.J. began making contributions to Southern Seminary in 2002 at the Leaders Associate level (annual gifts of $5,000 to $9,999). Both C.J. and Covenant Life Church (CLC) gave at the Leaders Associate level in 2003. From 2004 to 2007, C.J. gave at the Distinguished Associate level (annual gifts over $10,000), while CLC gave at the Leaders Associate level in 2004, 2005, and 2006. It appears the church did not make a contribution in 2007; however, C.J. contributed at the Distinguished Associate level (annual gifts over $10,000) once again in 2007. We haven’t bothered to check C.J.’s contributions for subsequent years. All of this information can be obtained from the SBTS Roll Call by following this link:
http://www.sbts.edu/media/publications/magazine/2008Spring.pdf (use the same website address but change the year accordingly going back to 2003 to verify the above information). Remember that the Roll Call included in the Spring edition of the SBTS magazine is for the previous year. For example, the 2007 Roll Call is published in the 2008 SBTS magazine. The information is stored in a PDF file, so allow a few seconds for it to be retrieved.
In addition to the annual gift levels, the SBTS Roll Call includes the “Lifetime Cumulative Gift Levels”. On the 2005 Roll Call, C.J. Mahaney was listed as a “Patron Member” (cumulative gifts of $25,000 to $49,999). Check out page 45 at this link: http://www.sbts.edu/media/publications/magazine/2006Spring.pdf
Incredibly, on the 2006 Roll Call, Mahaney has quickly risen to the level of “President’s Council” (cumulative gifts of $100,000 or more). Check out page 43 at this link: http://www.sbts.edu/media/publications/magazine/2007Spring.pdf
That’s quite commendable, to go from being a Patron Member to a member of the President’s Council in JUST ONE YEAR! In order to accomplish this feat, C.J. had to contribute a MINIMUM of $50,001.00 in 2006.
Until the cumulative gift levels for the SBTS Roll Call are increased beyond the $100,000 mark, C.J. Mahaney will always be listed under “President’s Council”. In 2007 he gave at the Distinguished Associate level (annual gifts of over $10,000), so we know that C.J. has given a MIMIMUM of $110,000 to Southern Seminary by year end 2007. Here’s the link: http://www.sbts.edu/media/publications/magazine/2008Spring.pdf (C.J. is listed on page 36 for the annual gift and on page 43 for the “President’s Council”.)
How did he do it? Here’s our theory. Books can be BIG BUSINESS with the right endorsements! C.J. Mahaney’s book Humility: True Greatness is copyrighted in 2005 and includes this endorsement:
“This is the right book from the right man at the right time.” R. Albert Mohler, Jr.
When Mahaney’s book Living the Cross Centered Life was published in 2006, Al Mohler wrote the forward. Dr. Mohler’s endorsement begins as follows: “The book you now hold in your hands is nothing less than a manifesto for turning your world upside down . . .”
By following the money trail, we believe we have discovered the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. When a rather obscure charismatic (C.J. Mahaney) receives a glowing endorsement from a well-respected Baptist leader (Al Mohler), the results can be extremely profitable for both Mahaney and Southern Seminary!
I'm verwy verwy sad, RT. We can start our own crew, how bout it? 
(and I can be stone cold...hehehe) 
February 10th, 2010 at 9:14 am
Claireon said in #92 “But the church is not God. The church is not Jesus. And the church is not the Spirit. Jesus prayed that we would all be one as He is One. But if we look at the history of the church, we see a tortured past. Throughout history, the church has often been the source of the abuse the Christian faith has suffered, and it’s no different today.”
Claireon, I’ve never looked at it that way before, about God not being the church. Thank you for sharing this. Can I please say a great big AMEN! That is so beautiful. And may I add to the last part of the quote above is that not only has the church been the place of great pain for the body, but, tragically, it has been the place of great pain for those we are called to love. (Spanish Inquisition, The Crusades, etc, etc.)
February 10th, 2010 at 9:38 am
Chad, wow. That’s about all I can say right now. Wow. I’m impressed, Brother. (I’ve almost never called anyone brother but I hope it’s OK with you that I did.) I want to be more like you. Seriously. I really admire the grace with which you just treated us in your last posting. Thank you. Thank you very much.
And oh, by the way, my wanker reference is still yours if you want since I consider myself one at times, too. If so, climb aboard the wanker boat with me and a lot of us on this board. If not, I’ll understand that, too. I mean, who would want to identify themselves that way? (Except those of us who recognize that we all are once in a while.)
Stunned
and impressed with the love and sensitivity you’ve shown and genuinely saying I want to be more like that example you’ve just set (not easy to do after all was said to and about you) Three “Huzzahs!” for you
February 10th, 2010 at 9:41 am
To sort of expand upon my comment #99…
I’ve talked about this before, but I think it bears mentioning again – I’m always amazed at what happens if anyone seems to insinuate something negative about one of the Reformed Big Dogs. It seems like people will come out of the woodwork to express their horror that anyone would dare question anything done or said by the RBDs.
It’s like the RBDs are always automatically far above and beyond reproach.
Now…I’m NOT intending to say ANYTHING negative about any specific RBD. I’m NOT insinuating anything with this comment.
Except to say, it strikes me as ludicrous that the people who make such a big thing out of their persistent innate sinfulness and talk so much about their total depravity and original sin would also be the very people who believe that certain celebrity preachers/teachers/leaders are automatically removed from the human responses and tendencies that perpetually beset the rest of us. It’s as if writing some great books or giving some powerful sermons or being a faithful pastor for 25 years have wiped out these heroes’ potential to EVER be wrong…to EVER respond the way the rest of us would respond…to EVER put their pants on one leg at a time.
(Oops. Just kidding with that last one…)
But seriously, think of the total logical inconsistency at work here. “Reformed” types are BIG into reading sin into everything they themselves might do or think. They are led to think like this in part because of what their favorite teachers/authors say. I know that in SGM, CJ models this all the time with his “I’m the worst sinner I know” talk.
And yet if someone seems to be pointing out something about one of these guys that might actually be slightly “off,” the IMMEDIATE reaction is that it Just Cannot Be So!! This or that RBD simply wouldn’t do or say or feel or think that way!!! He’s written books! He’s been wonderful! He’s an amazing pastor! He’s a fabulous leader! He’s ALWAYS demonstrating [fill in whatever amazing leadership attribute]!!!!
It’s just so ironic that so many of us who claim to hold to a “Reformed” understanding of human nature and sin really don’t believe that our own pet heroes might occasionally succumb to normal human weaknesses.
We will wag our fingers at guys like Ted Haggard. But the funny thing is, Mr. Haggard had more of a “Reformed” sense of his own potential to fail than CJ has demonstrated – at least in Mr. Haggard’s church, which he totally started singlehandedly, from the ground up, he’d had the wisdom to put in place measures that could enable his own ousting, should the need arise. He actually ANSWERED FORMALLY to guys who did not work for him.
February 10th, 2010 at 9:49 am
FGSP:
The internal revenue code does not require churches are not required to file Forms 990. So CLC does not have to publically disclose its financial statements and I think SGM Inc is accorded the same treatment.
I also enjoy your posts. well written and thoughtful.
February 10th, 2010 at 9:53 am
Five years:
Excellent post defending reformed theology versus SGM’s version of it. Sometimes here folks do throw out the baby with the bath in terms of dismissing reformed theology because of SGM’s poorly defined reformed views.
February 10th, 2010 at 9:57 am
Dear Lord ….
I’ve just read this post and the entire comments and to be honest this just chills my blood. I just need to repeat it in simple form to remind myself;
2005 – Both SGM AND C J Mahaney gave between $25,000 to 49,999 and became “Patron Member”.
2006 – C J Mahaney gave $100,000 or MORE and joined “President’s Council”.
2007 – Both SGM AND C J Mahaney gave $10,000 or more and became “Distinguished Associate”.
2008 – Ditto.
I’m just … staggered.
The verse that springs to mind is; (Matthew 6:2) – “When you give … do not announce it with trumpets … They have had their reward in full”. Enjoy being on the President’s Council and being a Patron Distinguished Marvellous Associate or whatever Mahaney.
Glad I rarely ever gave money to SGM (something just stopped me) – now I know where it went!
February 10th, 2010 at 10:35 am
5 years and formersgmer, there’s room in the Church Universal for reformed and not, for complementarian and egalitarian, for Calvinist and Armenian, charismatic and cessationist (sp?) and charismatic-liturigical, and more. That’s what I love–all the ways it’s possible to be a “good Christian”.
Of course, I do have my growing understanding sense of what’s better, but I feel strongly that the ground of all must be love.
February 10th, 2010 at 11:19 am
formersgmer -
True; churches don’t have to file 990s. Ministries do. DesiringGod, Ligonier, GTY, James White – their forms are online, available for inspection. Is there a loop that SGM slips through? It would be interesting to see their 990.
Thanks!
Former SG Pastor
February 10th, 2010 at 11:50 am
“5 years and formersgmer, there’s room in the Church Universal for reformed and not, for complementarian and egalitarian, for Calvinist and Armenian, charismatic and cessationist (sp?) and charismatic-liturigical, and more. That’s what I love–all the ways it’s possible to be a “good Christian”.
Of course, I do have my growing understanding sense of what’s better, but I feel strongly that the ground of all must be love.”
Acme…thanks. There is NO room for people who claim to be “Reformed” and then run their churches in a way that goes back to the Pre Reformation catholic polity.
A little honesty on their part about how non Reformed they are in some ways would be a positive step. SGM, believe what you want, but at least be honest about what you believe, and spare us these word games.
February 10th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
Agreed. I remember the tract table at clc and learning that the Mormons and jehovah’s witnesses tend to use familiar sounding words with unfamiliar meanings. I didn’t know then that clc was doing the same durn thing, that doctrines and practices would be changed at a whim and never directly acknowledged.
February 10th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
FSGP:
The ministries you mention probably disclose their Forms 990 on their own websites. Becauee of tazpayer confidentiality rules, absent SGM’s self-disclosure of its information returns, neither you nor anyone else will ever see them.
Although I can tell you that if you give money to SGM, the ministry will send you a copy of its financial statements with your year end contribution statement. I know this because I still have a copy of one the statement in my own tax return records from years when i used to donate to SGM.
February 10th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
Hey, folks…
For the record (because aspects of this thread may not make much sense now), today I suggested to Chad via email that he permit me to edit his comments and remove his full name and some of his identifying info.
Long ago, back in the blog’s early days, another commenter was furious with me and everyone else for our relative anonymity. To him, not posting on the internet with your full real name was an “integrity issue,” somehow evil because it enabled people to gossip and slander SGM (or so he thought) with impunity, among other things.
My response then – and it is the same one now – is that it is never a good idea to go around publishing stuff online under your full name. These things live on indefinitely out there in cyberspace. Who knows who may find it? Look how easy it was to find Chad’s MySpace and figure out way too much about him…and here in his opinion, that site doesn’t even reflect what he is like today. Imagine how he (and others who have posted under their full names) will feel 10 or 20 years from now, when someone researching them before a job interview finds their opinions posted for the world to see? What if they’ve changed their thinking in those decades? Nobody should be haunted by that sort of thing.
So, all of this is to say, I’ve gone in and taken out all the references to Chad’s full name, as well as some other details he shared about his family. He did not ask me to do it, but he agreed with my suggestion. I would strongly encourage anyone else out there reading this – anyone thinking of joining our discussion – to choose an online handle or nickname, or just go by your first name, if you feel like you’ve just GOT to be who you really are in real life.
It’s time-consuming to go in and edit comments, and I may not always feel so protective and generous…so really think it over before you plaster your views and real full identity out there for anyone with access to a search engine to find.
February 10th, 2010 at 1:03 pm
Kris – re: #112
Dude, you’re awesome! (I just couldn’t resist. Well, I could have but …)
Seriously, that was an incredibly nice gesture.
Humming Aerosmith tunes,
Former SG Pastor
February 10th, 2010 at 1:43 pm
Chad –
Thank you for your apology to the group here. It resonated with me for very personal reasons. I’m actually in tears as I write this.
As I think I said, I attended your church, quite recently. It ended badly, despite EVERY attempt at reconciliation — and IT HURTS LIKE HELL, pardon me. The individuals involved will not even speak to me. This all on the heels of previous — and egregious — spiritual abuse.
Your initial tone and attitude, both here and at Refuge, only confirmed my terribly low opinion of your church and only confirmed that I can expect to remain permanently unreconciled with these people. So, yes, fairly or unfairly, you are
“representing” your church on these sites.
That said, I’m impressed and grateful for your apology. The Holy Spirit is clearly at work in you. So that’s something indeed.
Thank you.
February 10th, 2010 at 2:14 pm
Just so no one gets confused, I am the one who investigated and wrote this article about contributions to Southern Baptist Theological Seminary by C.J. Mahaney, CLC, and SGM, which was first posted at The Wartburg Watch in May 2009 and then re-posted last week. Here’s the link:
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2010/02/05/the-mahaney-money-machine/
Kris is not to be blamed in any way for the information provided here. She is simply sharing what I have discovered with her readers.
If you have a problem with it, then I recommend that you to take it up with me.
Rest assured that the financial information is 100% accurate because I printed out the SBTS Roll Call from 2002 through 2007 and have stored them in a notebook (just in case this information ever mysteriously disappears from the internet). I have not been able to access the Roll Call for 2008 or 2009, although I have tried.
Sidney alerted me to the fact that Sovereign Grace Ministries has also given to SBTS. When I researched this information last May, I was only looking for contributions from C.J. Mahaney and Covenant Life Church. Silly me… SGM gave to SBTS too! Now I have to go back and amend my post at TWW.
Let’s cut to the chase and look strictly at “Lifetime Cumulative Gift Levels” as of year end 2007.
The Roll Call 2007 lists the following contributors and their cumulative contributions:
PRESIDENT’S COUNCIL (Cumulative gifts of $100,000 or more)
Individuals
C.J. Mahaney
Businesses, Denominations and Foundations
Sovereign Grace Ministries
Gaithersburg, Maryland
SUSTAINING MEMBER (Cumulative gifts of $15,000 to $24,999)
Churches
Covenant Life Church
Gaithersburg, Maryland
It’s noteworthy to mention that PDI gave to SBTS in 2002 at the Leader’s Associate level ($5,000 to $9,999). BTW, that was the same year that Sovereign Grace Ministries came into existence.
If you want to see for yourself, go to this link:
http://www.sbts.edu/media/publications/magazine/2008Spring.pdf
Mahaney and SGM are listed on page 43, and CLC is on page 44.
Just follow the money trail…
February 10th, 2010 at 9:08 pm
Thanks, Chad. This dudette now thinks you’re a pretty cool dude, bro…
Off topic, but I have a question. Today a friend of mine called to say her church in NC has become affiliated with a “denomination” called something like Harvest Church International. The church voted to join — now they find they have no further voting rights. The pastors are “elders”. A group her husband refers to as “The Mafia” came in to organize the church. They’ve spent a bundle on mega-decibel sound systems and remodeling. Have their own music and own books. Care groups start this week. Her descriptions of what is happening to her church sounded eerily familiar — sounded like SGM all over again. Does anyone have any information or insight into this uh, family of churches?
Thanks!
February 10th, 2010 at 9:47 pm
nickname:
I only had a couple of minutes to research you question because I’m watching an important basketball game — Duke vs. UNC!!!
I’d love to know where your friend’s church is located (city) because I live in North Carolina.
Please ask if she has been hearing the name James MacDonald at her church, and if so have her check out this link:
http://www.harvestbiblefellowship.us/
If this is the correct “denomination”, go and read this blog post:
http://blog.harvestbiblefellowship.org/?p=1138
Please let me know if Harvest Bible Fellowship is involved, and then I’ll share some additional information that may be beneficial.
February 10th, 2010 at 10:36 pm
Deb –#117 — Yes, that’s the correct group. I’d like to email you that info about the Harvest Bible Fellowship church privately. Couldn’t find out how to do that on your website. Please let me know after Duke and Carolina both lose! Thank you.
February 11th, 2010 at 9:01 am
My sister and I were talking yesterday, and it suddenly struck us as sort of funny, the way that people will leap to the defense of the Reformed Big Dogs.
I mean, why are people so eager to assume that the RBDs are automatically above any of the human drives and desires that sometimes motivate the rest of us?
It’s not like these guys are recluses, like recently deceased author J.D. Salinger, who shut himself away on his farm and has refused to publish anything since the 1960s. Nope. The Reformed Big Dogs all actively promote themselves.
Now, I’m not saying I think that they promote themselves for purely selfish, self-centered reasons. But at the same time, I think it’s silly to believe that because you agree with a particular RBD’s message or really like his books, or think he’s a dynamic preacher, that he’s this totally selfless, self-sacrificing, self-effacing Christian who’d never EVER have an eye on the bottom line…or on advancing himself and his own fame.
I mean, think about it. The RBDs have all WORKED at getting their books published. Book agents and publishers didn’t come begging at their doorsteps, pleading with them to please write something! No, these guys SOUGHT to get their works out to a larger audience.
Moreover, these guys put a significant amount of time and energy into flying around the country, speaking at conferences. They stride onto stages in the midst of standing ovations. They get their pictures plastered all over brochures and promotional materials.
Nothing wrong with any of this, mind you. But – at the end of the day, it still is WORK, and it’s still work that involves these guys’ self-promotion…and an element of fame-seeking…of seeking to increase their influence…maybe, even, of seeking to have more control…
Again, it’s not like I’m saying they do this for reasons that are all about themselves personally. But at the same time, I don’t understand why these guys’ fans can’t believe that there MIGHT be an element of ego, of self-promotion, of career advancement involved…why it’s such a stretch to imagine that CJ deliberately set out to get noticed, so he was intentional about where he donated money (and where he had SGM donate more money)…which then led to Al Mohler’s endorsement of CJ’s book…
If these guys were so above the rest of us humans, then we wouldn’t know their names and they wouldn’t collect speaking fees or charge for their books. They wouldn’t be “Reformed Big Dogs.”
February 11th, 2010 at 9:23 am
nickname,
If you have ever read our posts at The Wartburg Watch, you will quickly realize that Dee and I are EXTREMELY concerned about what is happening within reformed circles.
Last year Dee and I visited the Sovereign Grace Church in Apex on January 25, 2009, where we heard C.J. Mahaney deliver a “teaching” on Cravings and Conflicts.
We would be more than happy to visit your friend’s church some time soon and educate our readership about James MacDonald and Harvest Bible Fellowship. Sounds an awful lot like SGM!
Hope you were able to read James McDonald’s post entitled “CJ Mahaney is an Awful Sinner, but I am Worse!!” at this link:
http://blog.harvestbiblefellowship.org/?p=1138
One way C.J. and James MacDonald know each other is through the “Gospel Coalition”. It’s a group of reformed pastors who are forming strong alliances for the sake of the Gospel. Yeah, right!!! It’s all about power and control. Check out this link: http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/about
FYI – Dee’s former pastor is in this GC group.
We are in the process of revamping our blog, and the only working e-mail address right now is
dee@thewartburgwatch.com
If you will send your confidential e-mail to Dee, she will forward it to me. I hope to have my own working e-mail address soon.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
February 11th, 2010 at 3:54 pm
Kris, I’m totally with you and your sister.
It’s that whole “above reproach” (1 Timothy 3:2) thing. Christians take it as “they can do no wrong – EVER!” – like it’s not even possible.
Folks pretty much view the RBD’s like every other reformed pastor until they make celebrity status, then it’s up on a pedestal they go. And it’s not just any pedestal – it’s “fall proof.” If they keep their noses clean of the dirty stuff (like sexual sin), there’s almost a guarantee that they’ll always stay securely planted on top of the pedestal – “above reproach.” (And there are some that REALLY enjoy that pedestal.)
Woe to anyone who ever questions these guys. Their “fans” are a loyal group.
February 11th, 2010 at 4:04 pm
Kindred,
It struck me as I read your comment that it seems like the reaction – when someone points out something questionable about a Reformed Big Dog – is one of anger, like the person is questioning all of the RBD’s teachings or is saying something that will somehow negate the man’s life work.
It’s not that at all.
But you’re right, as long as they don’t get caught in any kind of sex scandal, they remain untouchable. It’s puzzling.
February 12th, 2010 at 11:07 am
*
*
*
I was told by a number of my CLC Pastors that time and money sent/spent/donated to non SGM churches did not count as they were not my home church or the church that God had called me to.
Reflecting on a conversation I had with an SGM Pastor, “There is nothing wrong with my church (CLC) being “Jealous” for what provision that God intends for the church that leads and feeds my family and I.”
What I find interesting is that these donations to other organizations seem to exeed the CLC “Benevolence” amount listed for the same calendar years.
I am curios as to what sort of a deal was made when Josh showed up. CJ seemed to get
publishing clout that was not there before. Josh seemed to get ownership of a very profitable business.
Both CLC and SGM re wrote their articles of incorporation at Josh’s arrival.
In this process, their member based oversight was dissolved, and replaced with pastoral elders.
February 12th, 2010 at 11:08 am
Kris said:
“But you’re right, as long as they don’t get caught in any kind of sex scandal, they remain untouchable. It’s puzzling.”
It think there may be a certain psychology behind this.
For various reasons when someone is so elevated in their mind, having almost a “perfect” state, they don’t want that illusion shattered. It would destroy their perfect world. In other words, they look up to this person so much that they don’t want to admit that some of what the person teaches or does is questionable.
Also when someone has so much invested in something they don’t want to have to admit that what were involved in was wrong. Take a long time SGM Member, who has spent a number of years of their life in the group and have given so financially. Because of this investment, they don’t want to have to admit that there are problems with the group including leadership. Thus they will ignore and not want to see the problems that exist.
In one book that critiqued Bill Gothard, the author share how it is that most people don’t like to admit they are wrong even for smaller matters. Imagine how much harder that is when one has a lot invested. You have to admit to yourself, friends and family that you made a wrong investment. When one has a lot invested, it is hard to “cut one’s losses” as the phrase goes.
I also remember someone sharing an illustration from a science fiction story. It was something along the lines of the regular people protecting leaders at almost all cost since if the leaders fell it would destroy their perfect world. Maybe someone could share this. This story wasn’t about Borg but another one.
February 12th, 2010 at 11:50 am
Unassimilated said:
“What I find interesting is that these donations to other organizations seem to exeed the CLC “Benevolence” amount listed for the same calendar years.”
Don’t forget that the actual amount of “benevolence” might even be lower than the line item shows. Some of SGM Churches include in the same line item honorariums given to out of town pastors that speak at their local church. Putting these two items together sure doesn’t make sense to me.
February 12th, 2010 at 1:15 pm
Steve said
“For various reasons when someone is so elevated in their mind, having almost a “perfect” state, they don’t want that illusion shattered. It would destroy their perfect world. In other words, they look up to this person so much that they don’t want to admit that some of what the person teaches or does is questionable.”
Excellent definition of what I would call a functional Pope. And many of us have had, or have them…instead of testing all things, we let them do the heavy lifting of telling us what to think and how to act.
February 12th, 2010 at 2:32 pm
Musicman
Good point about that type of thinking makes them a “functional Pope.”
It is also a lot easier and is the path of least resistance to want to just accept everything a person says without questioning vs. thinking, critiquing it, and checking it against scripture and logic. One way to put it to taking the path of least resistance.
When I was a child, one would think certain people such a teacher or your parents were like this. As you matured in age, you began to realize they didn’t know everything. It was sometimes coming to terms that someone you admired wasn’t nearly as perfect as what you once thought.
February 12th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
You may be interested in going to http://www.thewatchmanwakes.com where I show conclusively that John Macarthur is on board with the Church Growth/ Purpose Driven agenda. Macarthur speaks at Harvest Bible Chapel which is a family of 44 churches all with facilitator led small groups. These are real brainwashing/mind control churches. Harvest also has Mohler and Greg Laurie speak at their conferences. What is Harvest’s “Bible” for their small group facilitator training? It is CJ Mahaney’s book “Why Small Groups” which is really Marxism cloaked as Christianity. Macarthur, Mohler, James MacDonald, Mahaney, Laurie (why this charismatic speaks with the reformed? They are building the one world church.) These men are all agents for Satan.
February 12th, 2010 at 5:43 pm
Hi, bob -
Thanks for your comment, and welcome to the site.
I don’t really know what to say…it seems bizarrely sweeping and completely WRONG to call these men “agents for Satan” because their churches do small groups. I’ve read about the concerns some people have had about Rick Warren’s “consensus building” type of small group, how such “thesis-antithesis-synthesis” training will ease people into expecting to set aside their absolutes and become unsure of everything in which they believe. But I don’t think you can lump all small group interactions together under one label like that. Otherwise, you could even say that if you host a dinner party (which typically features a “small group” of people), you are engaging in thought reform.
That’d be ridiculous. And so is condemning the Christian leaders you mention.
February 12th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
Bob –
I never expected to defend John MacArthur anywhere, last of all places on this site, but I’d believe that CJ has long, blond dreadlocks sprouting from his bald head before I’d believe JMac is Purpose Driven.
Yep, that about says it.
Former SG Pastor
February 12th, 2010 at 6:55 pm
I second what FSGP says – John MacArthur is well-known for penning Ashamed of the Gospel way back in 1993, a whole decade before Rick Warren’s 30 Days of Purpose program seemed to sweep in and take over (and, in my opinion, water down) much of Evangelical Christianity. MacArthur’s critique of the market-driven church was amazingly ahead of its time, in retrospect.
Of course…on the other hand…
MacArthur, author of the arguably more controversial Charismatic Chaos, in which he completely roasts Charismaticism, focuses on the “crazies” like Benny Hinn, and basically equates the entire movement with the money-grubbing loons, is also now sharing the stage with the likes of CJ Mahaney.
But I’m guessing CJ is the one who changed, not MacArthur.
February 13th, 2010 at 9:08 am
I read “Charismatic Chaos” and still have the copy of it.
Imagine my surprise when I realized CJ and JMac (I like that, FSGP) were working some of the same circuits.
Talk about an oxymoron!
From pages 217 & 218 of “Charismatic Chaos”…
February 13th, 2010 at 10:00 am
Three years ago John Macarthur’s singles ministries were both using Rick Warren’s Purpose Driven model. After these ministries were publicly exposed, they deleted their websites. Check out the evidence here:
http://www.thewatchmanwakes.com/John-Macarthur-Grace-Church-Purpose-Driven-ministries-The-Guild-The-Foundry.html
Also, Macarthur now has ministries that are partnering with foreign governments. This is also part of Rick Warren’s communitarian agenda. Check it out here:
http://www.thewatchmanwakes.com/John-Macarthur-TMAI-partners-with-foreign-governments.html
What Macarthur says and does are 2 different things.
Kris,
Do I equate a dinner party with facilitator-led groups? Warren’s church has facilitator-led groups. All in his church must participate in them. They are called Marxist dialectic sessions and Soviets. They are brainwashing groups which will result in Christians losing their faith. These groups also invoke demons which place the group members in bondage. These groups come from the Kabbalah. The dialectic process employed by these groups comes from the Kabbalah. Macarthur’s church right now has these groups. All facilitators are agents for Satan and these groups are the basis for communist mind control. Facilitators are getting group participants to serve satan rather than God. ALL CHURCHES THAT EMPLOY FACILITATOR-LED GROUPS ARE CONTROLLED BY SATAN AND ARE WORKING FOR SATAN!! These Christans are being ushered into Satan’s one world government. Read more about them here:
http://www.thewatchmanwakes.com/How-small-church-groups-invoke-demons-church-growth-movement.html
All the men I mentioned are agents for Satan and the reason why Macarthur is in bed with Laurie and Mahaney is because he is an ecumenist building Satan’s one world church. Macarthur’s father was at the pinnacle of the world’s ecumenical movement. He was one of the most corrupt pastors in the US. Read it here:
http://www.thewatchmanwakes.com/John-Macarthur-father-Ecumenical-movement-Fuller-Seminary.html
February 13th, 2010 at 10:43 am
bob,
So you’re saying that any group led by a facilitator is automatically wrong?
I just can’t buy that. That’s bizarre. I’m not going to publish any more of your comments.
February 13th, 2010 at 7:02 pm
In addition to the fact, Bob, that it’s just poor blog etiquette to have your first comments on someone’s blog highlight your very own blog IN THE COMMENT. It’s a bit presumptuous. It’s piggybacking on Kris’ traffic for your own purposes.
Beyond that, I find it strange that you’re trying to prove your point by essentially saying, “Yes, I’m right, and to prove it, go look at what I said.”
Weird.
I wonder: If I facilitated a group where we discussed Bob’s writings, would he still consider me a pawn of the debbil?
February 14th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
Happy Valentines day….a
February 14th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
Happy Valentine’s Day to you too “a” – and to my special valentine…I think you know who that is
February 15th, 2010 at 9:15 am
I’m sad for Bob. I’ve seen a lot of folks like him on the outskirts of Christian online circles. They’ll seize at a bit of Scripture, misinterpret it, and construct a whole alternate theology around it, usually concluding that most Christians are apostate. It’s distressing, and I’m praying for him.
Aw, Guy and Kris! So cute.
February 15th, 2010 at 12:10 pm
Good Work, Kris. It may not have happened exactly in that process as far as how they met, etc., but you have nailed the real business relationship that occurs with them blurbing each other’s books, speaking at conferences, etc.
CJ has consistently bought his way in. (I am not convinced he used soley his income from the books for this from day one)
Now, let me ask a question. Do you all think a person who has blurbed a person’s book, written a foreward calling him the right man for the right time for all the world to see in black and white would EVER publicly rebuke that person or their church organization for anything?
No way. As a matter of fact, they have a vested interest in protecting that person and their organization. This can happen in several ways but the favorite tactic of the SBC is to promote the person, his sermons and books and invite him to speak. The non verbal communication is this: We, your great ones, are showing you this guy is ok. Since you follow US instead of Christ, we expect you to behave yourselves and never say negative truths about this person.
It works! Why? Because the young minds full of mush (like Russell Moore) want to be in the inner circles and have a similar career. You are not going to have one unless you follow the party line.
February 15th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
If you all thought the seeker charlatans were worshipped such as Warren, Hybels, Ed Young, etc…they have NOTHING on the reformed big guys. If you want to see heads spin just say something negative or question the deeds of any of them and see fireworks. The young guys know ST by Grudem better than they know scripture. Well, they think it IS scripture. They worship and follow Piper, Grudem, Mohler, Sproul and many others. They quote them more than Jesus Christ or even Paul.
And you all wonder why CJ wants to be accepted into the club.
BTW: I wonder if CJ was giving to Ligoneir when they were having all that trouble and lied about suing a blogger for questioning their financial accountability and lavish lifestyle? It did not help when Sprouls son was defrocked by the Presbyterians for tax number fraud, or when his grandson put on his myspace that he was inheriting the ‘family business’ and talking about his Lexus and their mansion while putting up shots of him guzzling beer.
They could not go through with suing the blogger because they could not find him. BTW: Ligon Duncan’s brother worked there as General Manager and now runs the place. Ligoneir finally fired his son in law, Tom Dick, who was totally incompetent even going on critical blogs and calling them names!
They finally got Sproul’s son to take his memoirs offline. In it, he called the woman who initially funded the Ligoneir ministry a ‘white witch’. I kid you NOT! He also talked a lot about his wild partying during those years.
It amazes me what folks will support out there. Ministry is like one big business enterprise led by wolves.
February 15th, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Hi, Malone -
Thanks for your comment, and welcome to the site.
I have to point out, just as a by-the-way, that I can’t take credit for piecing the financial stuff together. Dee from “Wartburg Watch” did that.
I really like how she provided documentation. The timing of CJ’s donations to Mohler’s seminary is uncanny…and totally makes sense.
And yes, you’re absolutely correct. These guys are just as much about promoting their ministries and maintaining their clout as they are about the Gospel Coalition or T4G. They’re not going to acknowledge that maybe CJ actually wasn’t “the right man for the right time,” or whatever Mohler’s book blurb said.
What’s ironic to me is that at the very time Mohler was writing those words of endorsement, CJ was overseeing a ministry/church that was at the height of its abusive practices. I do believe that with SGM’s diversification in recent years (with more franchises in more locations across the country), and with more and more people coming to SGM who are unaware of SGM’s Charismatic/Shepherding roots and expecting SGM to be “Reformed,” the more crazed situations (like Noel’s story) are less prone to happen now. But back in 2003 or 2004, when Mohler was writing his blurbs for CJ’s books and CJ was handing out his and PDI’s money to SBTS, PDI was still a relatively unknown ministry, with much more regimented, homogenous leadership behavior.
I find it ironic that the worst of the authoritarianism was in full swing right about the time Mohler was calling CJ “the right man for our times.”
February 15th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
So basically these guys decided it would be in their best interest to all come together to promote one another, protect one another, etc., etc. Hey, it worked! The first thing out of a defender’s mouth is the fact that CJ or whoever is “backed” by all the reformed big dogs.
“Together for the Gospel” is the name of the Christian conference organized by Mark Dever, C.J. Mahaney, Ligon Duncan, and Albert Mohler. The first conference was held in April 2006 in Louisville, Kentucky and was attended by nearly 3,000 people. John Piper, R. C. Sproul, and John MacArthur were also speakers.
I gotta hand it to them, it’s ALL pretty ingenious. “You scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours.”
It’s all very interesting when you look at the time frame in which Mark Dever, C.J. Mahaney, Ligon Duncan, and Albert Mohler really came on the scene, gaining “celebrity status.”
Very interesting.
February 15th, 2010 at 3:17 pm
Of course, they’re just “coming together for the gospel” – supporting one another, encouraging one another, and holding one another *accountable*.
Yeah, right!
I guess some would argue that 2 out of 3 ain’t bad.
February 15th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
What I can’t figure out is… (and I know what you’re thinking about right now. “One? There’s only ONE thing you can’t figure out. Honey Chile, there are dozens of things you can’t figure out!” And I’d agree. More heartily than you can imagine. There are hundreds in fact. But back to this one thing I can’t figure out.)…is, who cares what someone else says? I mean, if it isn’t God saying it, then who cares? I’m completely flummoxed why if Joe Schmo endorses you, it makes Christians more apt to listen to you? Why would they hold Joe Schmo in greater esteem than they would hold Larry Schmarry? (You see how I did that? I simply added “Schm” to the beginning of both words. I know what you’re thinking. Genius. That’s just how I roll.) Isn’t holding one person, no matter who they are, in higher esteem than another CONTRARY to the scripture where it talks about how Jesus was NOT a respecter of persons. And are we not to follow that same path?
Martin Luther wrote dozens of books in his life time. He had a gift for communicating what he believed. But by the time he was ready to pass away he realized what a complete waste all those books were. He said he’d rather see them all burned and have people only read the bible. When they read other stuff, they tend to think more highly of the author than they ought. Or rather, they tend to think about the author. Period. When, really, it’s God and our neighbors we should be thinking about.
So explain to me again why any Christian should give a rip what these guys are saying? And to be honest with you, I grew up in a home where there was full time minnistry and lay ministry going on all the time. I’m the only child in my family not married to someone in ministry, the only daughter who didn’t go to seminary with her husband (including the next generation), etc. But I’ve never heard anyone speak of the Reformmed Big Dogs in my life. I’ve never heard of anyone caring about ANYONE who was supposedly “big” in Christianity, nor did they ever acknowledge there was anyone “big” in Christianity. (There were 3 exceptions. We all knew who Billy Graham was. I had heard of Francis Shaffer, but only because either his wife or sister-in-law led my sister to Christ as a small child, then as an adult she and her husband knew them in seminary and my sister finally made the connection as to the name of the woman who led her to Christ and was able to thank her. Then there’s another one, but clearly it wasn’t important because, though it was a family connection and very personal, I can’t even remember. ha ha ha, God bless my Swiss Cheese memory.) All that said, millions of Christians go about their daily lives loving God, loving their neighbors, serving their communities, raising their families, etc, etc, without ever knowing the names of these silly “big dogs”, without caring that they even exist. So my question again is, “Who cares about what they have to say?” And more importantly, “Why?”
(Mostly I’m just hoping who ever does, just starts loving God and loving others and forgets about one person having more “status” than another.
God bless,
Stunned
February 15th, 2010 at 3:51 pm
I have to admit I am slightly surprised by this blog. Kris, i have seen you repeatedly state that this site was created “as a joke” and I understand that. However, looking through the comments submitted on this site, it seems this is a bit more than a joke.
I understand that sovereign grace has its fair share of things to joke around about. Yes, there are those all so common phrases, “better than i deserve,” “such a blessing,” “season of life,” etc. that seem to salt sermons and conversations (which i think the true meanings of those phrases really do reflect biblical principals…perhaps they are just a bit overdone:-). I also understand that leadership and members with in sovereign grace have sinned against people, perhaps in very offensive ways.
However, i question the intent behind this blog. Even if sovereign grace is completely in the wrong, even if CJ is a hypocritical leader, even if everything that occurs within the ministry is not from God…is this truly the way to address your issues. Are we not called to appeal to our brothers in Christ? I know you that you may be trying to just point flaws out, but it seems like your points are aimed at slanting people’s view of sovereign grace and its leadership. Thus, slandering the names of the leadership within sovereign grace. Aren’t we called to appeal to our brothers? And if it is at the point of them being your enemies aren’t you called to pray for them? Perhaps you have been sinned against greatly…but isn’t this like the parable Jesus tells about the man who owes the King great debt and is forgiven all of it and then he turns to the man who owes him a penny and shows no mercy? Are we not called to see our sin as greater than others?
“Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps not record of wrongs, love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth, it always protects, always trust, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails”
If you believe that CJ and Dave and Josh are Christians, shouldn’t you be patient for God to transform areas of sin in their lives? We are called to keep no record of wrongs and to not be easily angered.
I guess I’m just appealing you to consider, that if you feel sinned against and see areas of sin within the ministry, to appeal. If you have already appealed then pray. If you are praying, then continually pray. The only thing that can transform the lives of sinful people is the power of God’s word and his Holy Spirit.
February 15th, 2010 at 5:22 pm
Hey, “R.” -
Thanks for your comment. Welcome to the site.
Uh…now that the niceties are out of the way…
I have to say – heavy sigh.
Do people even READ here before they set out to set me straight?
I’ve never said that we started the site “as a joke.” Never. The SGM Survivors merchandise was begun as a joke, and because it kept getting misunderstood, Guy decided to remove it. But the site itself? It sort of just unfolded. It was started on a whim, because of the utter lack of what I perceived as “balanced” free speech about SGM, and then it’s since sort of evolved into what it is now.
But no – NOT a joke.
SGM has serious issues and (I believe) frequently misrepresents itself as an organization. Nothing funny about any of that.
On the other hand, though – maybe those of you who have been in that SGM mindset could enlighten me? – WHY WHY WHY does pointing out and discussing and analyzing SGM’s issues always have to come down (in some people’s minds, anyway) to the question of SIN? Or of my being WRONGED by SGM, or of my feeling anger or bitterness toward SGM?
Why can’t we just sort of dispassionately analyze SGM’s oddities and share our opinions and perceptions? Why do SGM’s issues either have to be “all in our imagination,” or then addressed as “sin”?
I don’t get this. I really don’t.
Do I necessarily have to believe that SGM is “in sin” if I believe that they do not run their organization in a way that is appropriate?
February 15th, 2010 at 5:39 pm
Kris,
When folks like “R” come on the site it’s just evidence as to the nature of the beast. They’re simply the product of what SGM (or some ministry or teaching like theirs) produces.
It’s really quite amazing how consistent it all is. They all literally say the same thing. Sad.
February 15th, 2010 at 7:11 pm
Stunned, I totally relate to what you are saying and it is my battlecry these days. I also grew up in a ministry home and we never followed man like I see folks following man these days. Our books were commentaries on books of the Bible but we did not even remember the author’s name. The study book was the Bible. We believed the Holy Spirit taught us through the Word if we sincerely pray and seek wisdom. For some odd reason, we did not feel the need to find out what a Piper, Mohler or CJ thought about something. Of course we discussed hard passages with other believers who came for study.
Why is it that in the land of freedom with bibles laying around everywhere, the internet with free Greek lexicons, the people are so biblically ignorant? Because they believe a human being who has been successful must tell them what they read means. They have replaced the Holy Spirit with men.
Even I got sucked into this folly for a while. I lost my First Love. I replaced Jesus Christ with succesful celebrity Christians to follow. (It is sort of a version of a groupie if you think about it)
Not any more.
) I am a Berean now.
February 15th, 2010 at 7:38 pm
By the way -
I didn’t mean to direct all my confusion toward our new commenter “R.”
It’s just that SGM defenders frequently email me with thoughts along a similar vein – “Kris, if you really believe that SGM is in sin, then you should confront them and not blog about it.” Or something to that effect.
And it just bugs me, because it’s like in the SGM mindset, there is this either/or sort of thinking – either something is “sin” or it’s A-OK. And, more importantly, the assumption seems to be that only things labeled as “sin” are worthy of analysis or criticism.
I don’t get that. I really don’t.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:25 pm
*
*
*
Hey “R”
One RBD seemed to have a few things to say when addressing a “Leader”.
“It is past time for the issue to be dealt with publicly.
Finally, it seriously overstates the involvement of John Piper and C. J. Mahaney to say they are “discipling” Mark Driscoll. In the first place, the idea that a grown man already in public ministry and constantly in the national spotlight needs space to be “mentored” before it’s fair to subject his public actions to biblical scrutiny seems to put the whole process backward.” -By John MacArthur
What is your process?
Are your men not positioned for public scrutiny?
If not, why do they deserve such loyalty?
How did Christ respond to his critics??
I find it hard to believe that a man or men, who are not willing to address anything publicly are willing to lay their lives down for anything.
I am still looking for the chapters where Christ went into a cave with his critics or the Pharisees to “softly address his concerns in private.” You know, for the sake of the Gospel.
Anyway
This is my quote for the day.
R.C. Sproul: True reformation and revival within the church and the winning of our culture to Christ will come only through the power of the Holy Spirit and our clear, bold proclamation of the biblical gospel, not through joint ecumenical statements that equivocate on the most precious truths given to us. There is no other gospel than that which has already been given (Gal. 1:6–8).
For me, an interesting commentary on organizations like SGM that seem to be more about their process, covenants, and unique definition of the “Gospel.” (And how it all intertwines with their unique polity).
PS – Steve 240, I forgot about the unique use of the term “benevolence” when dealing with SGM financials. Thanks for the reminder.