About the author
Eliza is a young woman who was burned by legalism, but then discovered that Jesus already kept the law for her. Her desire is to get to know Him better. She was in ATI for over 20 years.
More posts by Eliza
-
-
Their Day in Court: Part Three
February 22, 2019 // 151 Comments -
Their Day in Court: Part Two
February 22, 2019 // 0 Comments -
Their Day in Court: Part One
February 22, 2019 // 0 Comments -
Statement from Recovering Grace regarding the lawsuit a ...
March 28, 2018 // 186 Comments -
Rethinking the Nativity
December 25, 2016 // 144 Comments
-
Plaintiffs Amend Lawsuit Against IBLP, Also Sue Bill Go ...
January 10, 2016 // 1311 Comments -
Charlotte's Story
February 5, 2014 // 601 Comments -
Bill’s Cabin: Uncovering Sin
May 21, 2014 // 475 Comments -
How the Teachings of Emotional Purity and Courtship Dam ...
July 22, 2011 // 431 Comments -
Sacred Grooming, Part Six: A Secretary's Account of Lif ...
January 31, 2014 // 405 Comments
-
And who is being absurd here David? Bill Gothard a ...
May 28, 2023 -
As every satirist knows, the best way to expose ab ...
May 28, 2023 -
David, do you really want to compare companions ...
May 28, 2023 -
David said: "Exactly! To overcome the presumpti ...
May 27, 2023 -
Exactly! To overcome the presumption of consent, w ...
May 27, 2023 -
"I also believe Bill came up with this was to cove ...
May 27, 2023 -
There you go again, as Ronald Reagan might say. ...
May 27, 2023 -
Let’s not add hominem. Let’s subtract it. Beware a ...
May 27, 2023 -
I also believe Bill came up with this was to cover ...
May 27, 2023 -
Another thing to keep in mind is that a young girl ...
May 26, 2023 -
David, No, my outrage is against Bill Gothard's ...
May 26, 2023 -
The outrage is against twisted and sick use of scr ...
May 26, 2023 -
Brother Kevin, Like our author Miss Jones, your ...
May 26, 2023 -
"This is sick and so twisted, there is no defense ...
May 26, 2023 -
Garbage views like this is why Bill's teachings ar ...
May 26, 2023 -
I just re-read this article. Things that really ju ...
May 26, 2023 -
One has to sign up for Amazon Prime Video of which ...
May 26, 2023 -
Does anyone else plan to watch the docuseries on A ...
May 26, 2023
-
Very well expressed. Every single thing that we were ever taught has to be re-examined, and a lot of those teachings are entwined in the very core of our being. It took me three years to deprogram from Gothard's teachings, and another ten years to "move on" from the devastation caused by those teachings.
I had a discussion about this with my fiancee just the other night. She has said that I have not "moved on" yet from it, and this is 13 years into the future. It is a lifelong struggle in my opinion of deprogramming as Joy T. said, and to really remove the negative influences fully.
Fifteen years, hundreds of rants and vents, many tears, and a couple of novel-length stories, and I finally feel like I've put to rest so much of what I struggled with. But my version of "moving on" doesn't mean leaving it behind -- I want to warn others.
And I'm always one trigger away from a rant. So yes, thanks for explaining why it takes so much time and effort to deal with everything.
"One trigger away from a rant."
Oh, good. I'm not the only one. :-)
Great argument about why it's not always possible or even healthy to just "move on" and about how many times we need to reevaluate step by step and how that takes time.
Thanks for publishing this, Eliza. Very, very true.
Although I didn't go through IBLP or ATI my past involvement with another mission group and also a denomination the parallels are identical so even after 23 years of trying to move I still find myself trying to move on. Certain things said by others nearly always trigger a response in me that I find difficult to subdue. I always re-experience the helplessness and control. The way guilt is used and that feeling you just don't measure up because of some minor infringement of the rules is hard to deal with even now.
Mind control is a very subtle tool.
[...] recent article at Recovering Grace, entitled “Moving On,” prompted me to think about the reason it is so difficult to move forward [...]
I was searching for a different article for a friend, & came across this one from September 2011. It helps explain why some people "move on" faster than others..... and can then become impatient with those who are still struggling. "Just move on already" is about the least helpful thing you can say to someone who's working through issues. Just because *you* don't have a problem with a particular "stronghold" of wrong thinking, doesn't mean that everyone else escaped unscathed. It is SO important for us to show LOVE and COMPASSION and GRACE to those who are struggling, whether it's with ATI/IBLP or some other problem, or simply life in general.
https://www.recoveringgrace.org/2011/09/just-get-over-it/
This is such an important topic and post! Be patient with yourself and with others.
I have known those that have "moved on" without a glance backwards. Entire families that decided that they had other callings from the Lord that did not synch with ATI. The difference may be in something that Mr. G actually teaches . . . that when we have "unfinished business" with someone, cloudy conscience, bitterness (sorry, I said the word), we become "entangled" with the spirit of that person and cannot ever separate from them.
"Whatsoever is not of faith is sin" (Rom. 14:23) As believers in Jesus we never have the freedom to what we wish, but every action has to be a response to something the Lord has told us to do. There is a big difference from God leading a person out of ATI and a person getting mad and leaving. You leave in either case, but one is with freedom. This is exactly what Jesus said in Matt. 18 . . . A king forgives a large debt, the forgiven one turns around and gets mad at a fellow servant and makes him pay some real but small debt, the master gets mad and restores the original debt and delivers him to the "tormenters" to pay it in full. A life of torment . . . for not unconditionally forgiving a "fellow servant".
Back to "families leaving". I appreciate that a young person raised in ATI is not in the same situation as their parents, who voluntarily joined ATI. But . . . there is wisdom in showing respect for parents who were doing the best before God they knew how and allowed harm to come to a young person from that which was meant for good. Patience in getting even a partial "blessing" for moving on is worth a lot . . . it breaks a lot of that bondage that many struggle with for a lifetime. I have seen the exact same sequence in many other settings . . . those raised in certain churches, for example.
Alfred,
What you shared in your reply, reminded me of something I read once for one of my counseling courses a few years ago. It talked about why people often repeat the same stories over and over again, pointing out that when people repeat the same store over and over it's often because something in that story wasn't resolved for them. Asking them simple questions to take them deeper can help them recognize what they wish would happen or wish had happened for that story to be resolved. Resolving emotionally and internally what happened in our past is a big step towards moving on.
However, I think the point of this article was a bit different from what you are referring to as "unfinished business" or even bitterness. I believe this article was referring to renewing our minds and overcoming false teaching, more than dealing with unfinished business.
My personal story illustrates the point being made in the article. My family joined in the 3rd or 4th year of ATI, and once I reached my 20s I began serving in training centers full time for around 8 years. When I left the training center it was to move on to other ministry that God was calling me into. I left with a good relationship with the directors where I was serving and moved back home with my parents for a time. However, during my time serving at the training centers, I began to recognize things that I had believed all my life that were incorrect. The biggest area was that of authority - although I knew I was personally responsible to God for my actions I still felt I had to do what my authorities said in everything unless it was against one of the 10 commandments. God begin showing me that I was responsible to Him for all of my actions, even when I was following my authorities' orders. This revolutionized my life, and yes made things a bit bumpy for a while with my authorities. But I learned to respectfully follow God's leading and refuse to do things that I couldn't do in good conscience (even if it wasn't against one of the 10 commandments). I left the training center with the blessing of the directors. After some time at home, I moved out to join another ministry and once again left with a good relationship and blessing from my parents.
Living cross-culturally the past several years has opened my eyes to so many lies that I was believing, things that I had learned and accepted as truth through the Wisdom Booklets, the Basic Seminar, or the teaching at the training centers, etc. This has been a slow process over time of recognizing and evaluating where my beliefs came from and what the Bible really says in context. Even now, almost 7 years after leaving ATI I still find myself thinking or acting in ways that do not line up with God's Word, but are carry-overs from false teaching in IBLP.
So, while I "moved on," still respecting my parents and without bitterness or "unfinished business," I am still in the process of moving on in the sense of renewing my mind. For example, I still find it difficult at times to hear God's voice and to walk in freedom and obedience to Him rather than elevating my authorities above God's position in my life. This is an area that has been really difficult for me to "move on" in and I'm still growing and learning in this area. Yes, I respect my authorities, but I must make certain that my obedience and respect for God comes first.
While I understand where you're coming from in your reply, Alfred, I think you missed the point of the article here.
Blessings,
"Hope"
Well said, Hope! Thank you!
Hmmmmm....somehow I missed where the Bible says that your spirit can get entangled with another person's spirit and you can never get free from it. Maybe you can provide the reference for that?
As for me......I believed a lot of lies in ATI. Moving on isn't about forgiving someone or clearing my conscience. It's about getting the lies out and replacing them with truth.
For example...Gothard taught me that some cosmic force would work to make my fears happen. The Bible says that God delivers me from (not to) my fears. Gothard taught me that I could measure my spirituality by making lots of extra-biblical commitments. The Bible doesn't teach that at all and most of those commitments that I thought meant I was spiritual fall under Rom. 14's teaching on weak faith.
Alfred have you heard of the "straw man fallacy"? Allow me to attempt an explenation.
You are misrepresening the positions put forth in this article and many articles throughout this website.
To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position. Food for thought.
Alfred, I'm having a hard time understanding what you are trying to say.
Your first paragraph sounds to me like you are saying that we have a hard time "moving on" when we have a lot of hurt (you would probably call it bitterness). If that is what you are saying, may I remind you that there is usually a good cause for that pain? That pain could be resolved a whole lot quicker of the offenders were willing to admit they were wrong and change their behavior. It wouldn't do away with the need to replace negative and incorrect thought patterns over time, but it sure could make it a lot easier.
Also, there are many who have thought they have "moved on" because their outward life has totally changed. But years later, they realize they need to renounce the false teaching piece by piece because it is still affecting them even though they didn't know it.
"Whatsoever is not of faith is sin." Then why were we pressured to do whatever our authorities wanted us to? Were we supposed to live by their faith instead of our own? Very, very rarely were we ever encouraged to really hear from God for ourselves and act on it. Whatever we heard from God needed to be filtered by our authorities to be sure we "heard correctly."
"There is a big difference from God leading a person out of ATI and a person getting mad and leaving." Soooo...there is a right way and a wrong way to leave a burning building? I think the important thing is to get out, even if there is some injury in the process. This isn't about forgiving. It is about rejecting false teaching. Huge difference there.
Your last paragraph: yes, for those who really did have their children's best interest at heart, I'm all for keeping as much relationship as possible, while still maintaining boundaries that let us hear from God for ourselves and act on it. I am very grateful that my parents have done very well at this. But for those whose parents did not have the children's best interest at heart, waiting around for a "blessing" is only going to trap them in destructive cycles that will continually wound them even more. There are times when it is appropriate to cut all ties and not look back.
I missed your reply, Eliza. This forum format leaves a bit to be desired.
"may I remind you that there is usually a good cause for that pain? That pain could be resolved a whole lot quicker of the offenders were willing to admit they were wrong and change their behavior."
You may. But if God told you it was OK for them to hurt you that way, and that this was the very means of His greatest blessing for you, could you accept it and "move on"? If you really understood it, that is. If you were Joseph, dealing with the insane stuff his brothers did . . . would it be easy to move on when you realize that this was exactly what you would have wanted them to do if you had known what God was really up to? I mean . . . Joseph went to THEM and said, "Don't be mad at yourselves" . . .
"But years later, they realize they need to renounce the false teaching piece by piece because it is still affecting them even though they didn't know it."
I know that is true in areas where we secretly resonate with the teaching. Like the stuff the devil teaches us . . . that we are like God, that nobody has the right to treat us bad, that God should be thrilled that we are around, that sins are OK if we mean well . . . those things demand renouncing because part of our evil being demands it. Are you finding a parallel here?
""Whatsoever is not of faith is sin." Then why were we pressured to do whatever our authorities wanted us to? Were we supposed to live by their faith instead of our own?"
To whatever extend you heard that to be true - and I have heard people articulate that - I agree. Nobody ever has the right to tell me what God wants. They have the right to tell me what they want . . . Jesus "parents" told Him they wanted Him to come home from Jerusalem, not that God told Him to. Big, big difference. Because of their role, He respected that . . . just like a lot of the silly things the government tells us to do.
"Soooo...there is a right way and a wrong way to leave a burning building?"
Actually, there is :-) The wrong way gets you killed faster than the fire . . . by getting trampled, electrocuted, suffocated. And to compare ATI to a burning building . . . come on. If your parents and siblings are still inside, are you going to leave them there?
Alfred, I love your initial illustration in this comment! When next you chat with Bill, please deploy the comparison wherein he and his organization are in the role of the self-seeking brothers of Joseph. Then please log on back on to RG and share his response to this defense as soon as your schedule permits.
'Like the stuff the devil teaches us . . . that we are like God, that nobody has the right to treat us bad, that God should be thrilled that we are around, that sins are OK if we mean well .'
I don't think I'm like God. Created in His image? Yes, absolutely, but LIKE God? Isn't this a stretch, even on your part, to assume that's what we are saying? I've heard NO-ONE on RG say anything of the kind, although, oddly enough, there's OT and NT Scriptures that have expressions like 'ye are gods.' (obviously the context of those verses do not indicate that we are gods, nor do I think that's what it means, just making a point.)
Second point: Nobody has the right to treat us bad. You are suggesting this is something the devil teaches? No-one has the right to sin against another person. (yes it happens, we all have been sinned against, and have sinned against others, but that's no excuse). No-one has the right to harm another human. (exceptions being earthly justice provided by legal systems, and certain parental disciplines as the occasion requires.) But those are not 'harms' in the context of evil being done.
I think most likely you meant, 'Nothing bad should ever happen to me because of xyz.' If that was your thought, then I would agree, it's fallacious, and most likely of the devil, but your context is: "no-one has the right to harm me, ergo, it must be right for CERTAIN people to 'harm' me (harm here being evil doing, which again, is a sin.)
I hope to heaven I made that last point clear.
Third point: "God should be thrilled that we are around." Not sure this one is even worth debating. That's not what we're saying, although if you are suggesting that God isn't thrilled when His people come to Him, that's a very dangerous mindset to have.
Fourth point: Sins are ok if we mean well. Again, is this even up for debate? Where do you see us saying any of this? Or is this just a straw man to prove your point? No-one on here believes the end justifies the means, although plenty of us could assure you that that's how B G has run his programs. But that's not for me to elaborate on.
so, to move on, the Scripture that says, "God works all things for good, for all those who believe in Him, and according to His purpose." Do you believe this means 'sin is ok'? Since God will turn anything into good?
Your example of Joseph being sold, do you imagine that though it was God's plan, that God smiled on the injustice? The multiple sins that were committed against their father, their brother, etc, that God was ok with it? Consider that if his brothers hadn't done what they did, that God would have found another way to get Joey boy into Egypt.. cuz He's God and He can do that...
I think I understand where you are coming from, that in some cases we need to suffer for righteousness sake, and if so, I do agree with you, the problem we have is evil people parading in God's name (like that's never happened before) and doing horrible things to us. At what point does it cease to be righteousness to 'take' it? Esp. when you see young people being led astray, or otherwise destroyed? At what point do you stand and say, this is enough, it's got to stop, especially since you are claiming to be 'of God' and you are doing HORRIBLE things. Etc.. At this point, I'm not even talking about BG, I'm talking about an all-encompassing wolves in sheeps clothing around the world today.
At what point do you stand for truth and justice? These questions are too serious to simply have a pat answer and walk away, leaving someone to possibly lose their soul because no-one stood up for them..
Heather: I NEVER wanted you to engage on the examples that the devil might use with us . . . forget it. I mean, he does lie to us, right? Pick any example you want . . . the stuff that we have to work hard to leave are things we secretly sort of agree with. Maybe that is, "You are like God to your children, so be sure to tell them that God told you to tell them to do thus and so" That feels good . . . so . . . maybe I am tempted to follow through on that. Sorry for the churn . . .
I just get interested when some people can drop a "false teaching" like a hot potato, and others labor to get free. My conviction is that the latter is tied to parts of us we really like, which is why it is hard to leave.
SOMETIMES it is because there is real truth there . . . and we haven't quite gotten the baby out of the bathwater yet. In that case we should go slow and get it right. I mean . . . if the fact that some people make gods out of authorities is wrong, that doesn't justify the next person worshiping rebellion.
Alfred, the fact that God uses something for good (Joseph) does not change the fact that evil was done. Should the brothers have done what they did? Of course not! Did God use it anyway? Yes. Was Joseph right to put his brothers through the wringer before revealing his identity? Absolutely. He was checking to see if they had really repented or not. Only when he saw they had, did he let them know he had already forgiven. Had they not repented, we don't know for sure what he would have done, but he certainly had the power to bring justice. He needed to be sure they were trustworthy before he brought them to Egypt.
I certainly do believe that God has used and will use everything I have been through for something good - either for me or for someone else. But no. That belief does not help me move on. In fact, for me, it did the opposite. That belief held me back from becoming the person God created me to be. Because the way it was taught, it made me think that evil=good as long as God uses it for good. Therefore, I should allow myself to be mistreated as much as possible. I should be a "servant" and just do whatever was asked of me. This left no time for hearing from God about His plans for my life. I was too busy trying to fulfill everyone else's plans for me.
Heather did a good job of refuting your next paragraph. No one has a right to treat us badly. God's standard is to love our neighbor as ourselves. Just as I am not allowed to hurt others, neither are others allowed to hurt me. It is not God's design. Letting someone else hurt me when I can prevent it is just as wrong as them hurting me.
Having said that, yes, there are times when I accept pain from someone, knowing they are unable to relate differently at the time. I see that they are trapped in wrong thinking. So I allow the pain temporarily while helping them see that it is not a healthy thing for either of us. In that case, it is my choice to allow the pain for a higher good, at God's direction. However, if it starts overwhelming me, then I have to set boundaries so that I do not start acting in ways that hurt myself or others. Also, to allow the pain from that person to continue for a long time without addressing the real issue with them is worse than pointless. It is very damaging to both parties.
And God IS thrilled to have us around. That is one thing that totally changed my life for the better when I started believing it. That God is actually happy to be with me. You can't trust someone with your deepest heart unless you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that they delight in you and love to be with you. I would date my relationship with God (not just knowing all the right answers) to when I started believing this.
Are Mr. Gothard's abuses of his staff and his false teachings ok because he meant well? Is it ok that he is not under authority simply because he is doing God's work? I do believe there is a huge difference between deliberate sin which hurts others and making a mistake that you correct as soon as you know you made it.
I do agree with you that part of the Christian life is constantly learning truth and renouncing the lies we have believed.
As for the fire analogy, why do you think I'm writing for RG? I'm trying to get as many people out of the fire as possible and help dress the burn wounds! Thankfully, my family is already out.
And if you have followed my posts here at all, you know that I do advocate finding a safe way to leave the building. I do not recommend jumping out of 10 story windows, nor did I leave that way. However, I also do not recommend waiting for an authority to tell you it is ok to leave the building before you do so. It is unnecessary and most likely very dangerous to wait, especially if the authority is refusing to acknowledge the fire or leave the building themselves.
Oh, and there is at least one other reason why we might have a hard time letting go of a false belief other than because something in it appeals to us. That would be because we were subjected to mind control and haven't yet been able to unearth and combat all of the related lies. Some of these lies were drilled into us for many years in various circumstances. Even if it benefits you to disbelieve them, it can take some time to uproot them. Digging up a mature tree takes a whole lot longer than pulling up a dandelion.
"Alfred, the fact that God uses something for good (Joseph) does not change the fact that evil was done."
Of course not. But it does help us to "move on". Knowing that a certain discomfort and pain was really "for our good" takes and sting away. Like labor for a woman in childbirth . . . Afterwards she "moves on" . . . A doctor's treatment . . . even some severe punishment, that we later appreciate. In each case people definitely "move on". When we can't do so, there are other reasons. There clearly are more negatives than positives.
"No one has a right to treat us badly. "
I saw what she wrote . . . boy. LOTS of people have the right to treat us "badly", i.e. in a way that we do not want. Parents spend the early years of a child's life applying some undesired "badly", pain and deprivation and otherwise. As Scripture says, we appreciate it later. I am obviously not talking about abuse . . . but things which are really designed to improve a child are respected if not immediately desired.
Same for the government . . . they do things to us that we really don't like. Lots of people rebel against taxes and conscription and fines and imprisonment. Yet they all are there ultimately for our good. It is immature to not accept it in that way.
IF God wants to apply some of that "good discipline" even using the stupidity of others, if we know it to be so, can we "move on" and stop blaming that stupidity more than we bless the overarching controlling love of God? Did Israel spend centuries blaming Pharaoh for decades of abuse? No . . . it has a happy ending . . . they could "move on". God's love was bigger than Pharaoh's self-centeredness if not hatred.
Again, I am not talking about excusing abuses. I am literally talking about being able to "move on". There are contexts in which the most severe trial is seen through the eyes of a loving heavenly father, allowing us to fully release our offenders to His loving justice . . . and "move on".
"That would be because we were subjected to mind control and haven't yet been able to unearth and combat all of the related lies."
I dunno. I am not sure that exists. Not when we really are "unified" in our understanding that they are lies. Gone in a heartbeat. I read about young girls that at puberty morph into boys (look it up, it is real). I will spare the public details. Talk about believing a "lie" . . . yet in all but the tiniest fraction of cases they "move on" without a backward glance. No residual effects on their ability get married, to lead normal healthy lives.
I have seen this with people who get saved out of some awful beliefs and lifestyles. Sure there may be issues . . . but . . . nothing like this constant "soul tie" back to the past. They are free, they "move on".
I stand by my allegation that we can't do so when part of our being still really "believes". MAYBE because some of it is true, and our spirits - conscience - can't violate the truth. Hate evil, but love the truth, no matter who is selling it.
"Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding." (Proverbs 23:23)
So . . . be free. It's your birthright. "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace." (Rom 6:14) Nobody but us can allow sin to have control over us . . . nobody.
Alfred, I find it THRILLING that you did not include the part in my response where I clearly exempted parental and governmental discipline from the 'no harm' rule, thus making me look like I said something that I didn't actually say. Way to go on making yourself look credible.... um, NOT. I would appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth.
also, when you responded to my devil's engagement post with horror, that you never meant for me to discuss it, I must ask, WHY did you post it then? You all but accused us of believing those things as a matter of fact, then got upset when someone challenged it? You can't just go in with guns blazing and say whatever you think will make your point, and then be upset when someone calls you out on it, Alfred. I call foul!
Also, comparing physical pain of childbirth (which YOU can never experience) to emotional or spiritual damage, is a false dichotomy. In my own experience, physical abuse/pain is absolutely the easiest abuse to recover from. Hands down.
I congratulate you on writing your last comment so ambiguously that your point is 100% lost.
"Did Israel spend centuries blaming Pharaoh for decades of abuse?"
This is another stellar biblical example! The Exodus is one of the most frequently retold stories in history, and invariably starts with description of suffering and enslavement in Egypt, much as RG first person accounts often start with descriptions of injustice and spiritual slavery in ATI (albeit with acknowledgement that the melons there were pretty good). The story of Exodus involves leaving Egypt, as the personal narratives you'll find here involve leaving Gothard's organizations.
Of course the Exodus ends not with leaving Egypt and remembering what great lessons Pharoah taught Israel through his exhortation and wisdom, but with a long hard journey to the promised land. One could rightly point out that the difficulty and duration of the journey was at least partly attributable to the behavior and complaints of Israel along the way, but I must say I've never heard a version wherein Israel suffered for leaving Egypt the wrong way, and certainly not a version wherein Israel's sin was leaving Egypt in the first place, or being too verbally hard on Pharoah after the fact. The condemned complaints in the desert were against God and Moses, not Pharaoh and his residential labor program. The latter is one of history's most frequently cited examples of injustice rightfully fled.
I'm also not familiar with an interpretation wherein Pharaoh comes off as a well-meaning good guy who just got a little off track, or a wise teacher, or a man who had done a lot of good decades earlier and just become a bit loopy in later years. Pharaoh is remembered as one of history's all-time icons of stubbornness, pride, and general villainy, and this even with the excuse that God is cited as personally having hardened Pharaoh's heart.
So, Joseph's brothers, check. Pharaoh, check. Please, keep these delightful illustrations coming! They're a little harsher than I might have gone with, but work startlingly well.
Oh golly, did someone actually use the words, "bathwater" and "baby" in the same sentence, again?
So far as fleeing a burning building and leaving your siblings behind... You think you're funny, but this is a reality many of us have had to face. Thankfully, in time, we were able to get my two remaining younger siblings out, but it was no easy matter. You speak whereof you know not.
Heather: "Alfred, I find it THRILLING that you did not include the part in my response where I clearly exempted parental and governmental discipline from the 'no harm' rule, thus making me look like I said something that I didn't actually say. "
Sorry - I am getting posts from all directions . . . I was responding to Eliza's reference to your response, so didn't go back and re-read it.
"I congratulate you on writing your last comment so ambiguously that your point is 100% lost."
Which one? "So . . . be free. It's your birthright. "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace." (Rom 6:14) Nobody but us can allow sin to have control over us . . . nobody." That one?
We are discussing being in bondage to "false teaching", which controls us . . . seems like another word for "sin". Bondage . . . Paul said that grace gives a life free from bondage. Because grace makes us free (we "are" under grace), we "move on".
Beth: "The Exodus is one of the most frequently retold stories in history" Told with joy . . . that is "moving on", as far as I am concerned. Would you agree?
The story of Egypt is also told as warning and given as a bad example. IOW, one can move on yet continue to bring up the past as a warning to others.
You know, I got up and came to work this morning without ever hearing any specific direction from God to do so. But wisdom and my responsibilities dictated that it was the right course of action. Rom 14:23 is not saying that a person must have specific, explicit, direct, individual communication from God authorizing them to leave home. I believe that it is suggesting two spheres: faith, and sin (notice that Paul is not contrasting Law vs. sin but faith vs. sin). If staying at home is not done in faith, then that is sin. If leaving home is done in faith, then this passage is being obeyed.
Each one of these verses - you are taking them out of context and making them say what you want them to. You are not submitting to the text; you are forcing the text to submit to you. This includes where you say "This is exactly what Jesus said in Matt. 18" but it's not "exactly" what Jesus said at all. Bitterness and forgiveness are the subjects Jesus was on, and that would apply equally to parents bitter at their kids as well as kids bitter at their parents.
I believe the point of agreement we would have in what you are saying is that if a child chooses to leave in a cloud of bitterness, that's the child's decision and it will hurt that person in the long run. But your logical fallacy is false dichotomy: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white There is a presumption that the parents are right and the children only want to leave due to bitterness. But sadly, there are many parents who are good at keeping up appearances but who are addicted to control and manipulation and are failing to act in their kids' best interest.
By way of caricature, look at the response from the Westboro Baptist Church to Megan's recent leaving: “She just decided that she didn’t want to obey God...She didn’t want to obey the scripture.” If her two choices are to leave bitter or to wait for a blessing from her parents, how long must she wait? But what if staying at home and in that abusive church is not of faith, what if it would be more in faith to walk away and face the rejection and accusations of her family in order to live the life God has for her? Again, this is a very extreme example, but I've seen shined-up families who look great on the outside but behind closed doors it's the same thing on a smaller scale. When the kids do leave, the parents assassinate their character, call them bitter, ask the church to pray for them, etc. etc. etc. This is part of the "fog of confusion and evasion" (http://www.opc.org/nh.html?article_id=412)
In sum: yes, we must all choose not to be bitter, but no, none of those verses nor real life dictate that a child has the false dichotomy of stay in God's will vs. leave bitter. Sometimes, and certainly not always, but sometimes they need to leave and endure tremendous attacks and rejection from their family and church.
oops, forgot the link for the quote from the church: http://fox4kc.com/2013/02/07/westboro-founders-granddaughter-leaves-church-takes-sister-with-her/
Great reply Matthew! 'When the kids do leave, the parents assassinate their character, call them bitter, ask the church to pray for them, etc. etc. etc' absolutely infuriated me this morning, I've had to take a step away and calm down. It's so typical. After all the lies I've witnessed from my parents, it wouldn't surprise me. Course the worst of it is, they have deceived themselves, and I suppose they genuinely believe that they are speaking truth, however it's NOT truth. And there's no way to get them to see that unless God does to them what He did to me to wake me up.
You know, I got up and came to work this morning without ever hearing any specific direction from God to do so.
If you took a BITE today without faith, it was sin. "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." (1 Cor 10:31) Sounds like you are in trouble . . . or . . . did God lead you into that perpetual job? And didn't direct you out of work today? If so . . . maybe you are OK, then. Still in faith.
"There is a presumption that the parents are right and the children only want to leave due to bitterness."
You have been dealing with too many Gothardites, Matthew :-) I never said that, nor did I imply it. I said leaving MAD was a bad thing to do . . . I gave examples of people who left happy in the Lord. I have NO problem with that. If God leads you out, you will sin by staying.
By way of caricature, look at the response from the Westboro Baptist Church to Megan's recent leaving: “She just decided that she didn’t want to obey God...She didn’t want to obey the scripture.” If her two choices are to leave bitter or to wait for a blessing from her parents, how long must she wait?
Hypotheticals get everyone in trouble. If this is a real situation, then I guess I would need more information. Is she determined to leave because they hate gays? Or protest at military funerals? I have an insanely hard time understanding what they do in the "Name of the Lord". What is Megan's reason for leaving? What is her parent's reason for staying? Is she underage?
But what if staying at home and in that abusive church is not of faith, what if it would be more in faith to walk away and face the rejection and accusations of her family in order to live the life God has for her?
Based on that logic, Jesus should have left the synagogue and would have moved to the top of a holy mountain. I mean . . . whatever may bother us, He is absolutely revolted by evil, especially religious evil.
But . . . He didn't.
We are, perhaps, more holy that He is?
Do you know, BTW, WHO said "Holier than Thou" in the Bible and to whom?
I've been away from this forum for awhile, so I'm gonna have to make a guess that your two options of leaving, either "mad" or "happy in the Lord", refer to leaving IBLP, and therefore by default, that there are two options for leaving abusive situations. I am cracking myself up over here at the idea of leaving an abusive situation of any sort, "happy in the Lord". In fact, I am mentally superimposing this idea over different scenarios, just for the sheer, hokey comedy of it =D
Hannah: Context . . . when bad doctrine is taught, we gotta get out no matter what. Like the Westboro Baptist Church. My point is that that is not how Jesus handled it . . . in the end, they kicked Him out.
Hm, well, I see that your initial comment referencing, "moving on", doesn't really specify what you are referring to. Although I like the vague hocus-pocus about the other person's ghost following you around, either as a sort of spirit guide or a demonic harrassment, while they are yet alive. That's just as entertaining as the comment I reference, above.
In all seriousness, though, you're saying you remain under false doctrine and keep your children under it, until you are kicked out? That you continue to listen to the lies and be influenced by them, because this is what Jesus did? Yeah, I don't see that in Scripture. I see Jesus advocating the opposite, that we would know the TRUTH, and that it might set us free.
And they didn't *exactly* kick him out. They crucified him. Minor detail.
Well, I totally left home... no, FLED... in fear. Like the analogy of escaping a burning building: There was no stopping to analyze whether the decision was made in faith or fear or otherwise properly, there was only GET OUT NOW!! In retrospect, I think perhaps my life depended on getting out when I did, as I was already barely treading water, in a severe depression.
Alfred, I'm finding your response to be full of stereotyping and unproven assumptions.
How do you know that those who support RG didn't leave ATI "of the Lord's calling?" The entire purpose of Recovering Grace is to point out how Bill Gothard/ATI/IBLP is twisting Scripture, and is hurting many hundreds, if not thousands, of people with it in the process.
You may say "But Mr. G isn't twisting Scripture." Assume for a minute that he is. Wouldn't it then be "of the Lord's calling to separate from ATI in that situation?
Regarding your statement "As believers in Jesus we never have the freedom to do what we wish," what are you limiting that to? Are you saying "we don't have the freedom to do what we wish if it involves sin," or are you going further than that?
As for forgiving, for one, if Mr. Gothard is indeed twisting Scripture and hurting families in that process, then please explain how he still is a "fellow servant" of God. Furthermore, how is speaking out against the Scriptural error of one's teaching a sign of unforgiveness?
Don:
"How do you know that those who support RG didn't leave ATI "of the Lord's calling?""
Never Implied that. I am just going back to leaving and then struggling with the past. If the Son and the truth set us free, how does that work if by our own admission we are still not free years later?
You may say "But Mr. G isn't twisting Scripture." Assume for a minute that he is. Wouldn't it then be "of the Lord's calling to separate from ATI in that situation?
Back to my comment to Hannah. I just don't see Jesus doing that. He stayed - they left Him, not vice versa. Which dies not imply we never leave, however. It just speaks to the implied demand that Christians leave bad teaching or sin.
Regarding your statement "As believers in Jesus we never have the freedom to do what we wish," what are you limiting that to? Are you saying "we don't have the freedom to do what we wish if it involves sin," or are you going further than that?
Sin is by definition "not faith". The verse says that every aspect of life is either faith or sin. Scripture makes it clear that even what we have for lunch must be "to the glory of God". Doesn't take much to make my tie color be for His glory. Something as major as leaving ATI certainly must be "of faith". If it is God's direction, we can "move on" with peace and confidence.
"As for forgiving, for one, if Mr. Gothard is indeed twisting Scripture and hurting families in that process, then please explain how he still is a "fellow servant" of God. Furthermore, how is speaking out against the Scriptural error of one's teaching a sign of "
Implication is that every human being is our "fellow servant" in this context, sort of like "neighbor" elsewhere.
Alfred, good morning!
Sin is an immoral act considered to be a transgression against God's law.
*Alfred: "Back to my comment to Hannah. I just don't see Jesus doing that. He stayed - they left Him, not vice versa. Which dies not imply we never leave, however. It just speaks to the implied demand that Christians leave bad teaching or sin."
Your comment to Hannah was that people left Jesus. Jesus was crucified and said nobody could follow him or drink the cup He was going to drink.
Are you comparing Jesus to Bill Gothard?
Wes:
"Sin is an immoral act considered to be a transgression against God's law."
"Immoral act" confuses me . . . can you clarify? Where did you get that from? Paul just said sin was anything not "of faith". So I kinda go with that.
people left Jesus.
People left Him all of the time.
"From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him." (John 6:44)
They kicked His followers out . . . I can't imagine they didn't kick Him out too, eh? "And they cast him out." (John 9:34)
Actually, they did! "And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath, And rose up, and thrust him out of the city" Luke 4:28-29
"Are you comparing Jesus to Bill Gothard?"
You mean Phelps, of Westboro? Which is what we were immediately talking about. No way . . . I am comparing people like you who sit under that teaching to Jesus. You, know, "What Would Jesus Do?"
And . . . I keep confusing you with Keith . . . not sure why.
Alfred, you said "I have known those that have "moved on" without a glance backwards. Entire families that decided that they had other callings from the Lord that did not synch with ATI. The difference may be in something that Mr. G actually teaches... that when we have "unfinished business" with someone, cloudy conscience, bitterness (sorry, I said the word), we become "entangled" with the spirit of that person and cannot ever separate from them. "
You haven't been in our situation Alfred, so how can you understand? Let me use an analogy:
Let's say you're taking a gun training class. You've shot guns before, but when you get to the training class, you find that you're holding the gun wrong, and a lot of what you're doing in your shooting is wrong. You've been given the truth here, but now you have to relearn everything you did, to kick the bad habits.
In the same sense Alfred, Christ set us free from bondage. But because we've "done it wrong," we now have to relearn how to read the Bible, relearn what a Biblical relationship with God looks like, and so on.
Regarding your claim that you don't see Jesus leaving such a situation, then how do you explain 2 Corinthians 6:17 where it says "Come out from among them, and be ye separate?"
As for your term "bad teaching," do you mind defining that? Are you making a distinction from Scripturally faulty teachings? Because if you read Scripture, we are warned to confront false teachers,
As for your statement "sin is by definition, not faith," you left out the previous phrase of Romans 14:23, which helps to clarify. "And he that doubteth is damned if he eat." Therefore, if we have legitimate doubts about something, then to us, it is sin, because we don't have faith we're doing what's right.
I see what you're saying with the "fellow servant" subject. Thank you for clarifying.
However, does speaking out against the Scriptural error of one's teachings equal unforgiveness? I don't think so.
Don:
In the same sense Alfred, Christ set us free from bondage. But because we've "done it wrong," we now have to relearn how to read the Bible, relearn what a Biblical relationship with God looks like, and so on.
This is the type of statement that freaks me out a bit. I understand issues of balance . . . But a new way to read the Bible? A new way to know God? I have been studying Bill Gothard intently for a literal 40 years (1973). Along the way I have also participated furiously on every anti-Gothard forum I have been allowed to. I do it because I love Jesus with all my heart, Bill Gothard means a lot to me, and I want the truth. I appreciate some hyperbole . . . But to whatever extent that is true, I do start to understand why people find it almost as easy to ditch Jesus as Gothard.
Regarding your claim that you don't see Jesus leaving such a situation, then how do you explain 2 Corinthians 6:17 where it says "Come out from among them, and be ye separate?"
The context is 5 groups of people . . . Unbelievers, unrighteousness, darkness, Satan, and infidels. I know people have called Bill Gothard a lot of things . . . But unsaved? Devil's spawn?
As for your term "bad teaching," do you mind defining that? Are you making a distinction from Scripturally faulty teachings? Because if you read Scripture, we are warned to confront false teachers,
There is a chasm of difference between a confused teacher who loves Jesus -like Apollos (Acts 18)- and unsaved wolves in sheep's clothing. Right? AND even beyond that, Jesus made a difference when the ones teaching were in positions of God ordained authority, which may apply to the granddaughters of the Westboro church leadership, which was the context.
Matthew 23:2-3 "Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works:for they say, and do not."
As for your statement "sin is by definition, not faith," you left out the previous phrase of Romans 14:23, which helps to clarify. "And he that doubteth is damned if he eat." Therefore, if we have legitimate doubts about something, then to us, it is sin, because we don't have faith we're doing what's right.
Exactly. I meant nothing else. My point is that this gives so much confidence. Confidence to "move on". I know you don't believe me, but I love Jesus way more than Gothard. There is a time to move on for a lot of reasons.
However, does speaking out against the Scriptural error of one's teachings equal unforgiveness? I don't think so.
Doesn't. Unforgiveness is . . . Unforgiveness. Wanting God to exact from a person all that the took from you. Hating them. Not loving them. Leaving angry. We are supposed to get over our anger by sundown. I will be the first to admit that lots of grace is often required
Alfred,
I don't exactly know why you should be freaked out. If we've been doing something the wrong way, then are we not supposed to relearn how to do it correctly, even if it is new to us?
I had a family member who told me recently that he had attended a Basic Seminar back when the Institute was called IBYC. He found many of Gothard's teachings to be Scripturally lacking, such as Gothard's definition of grace, his emphasis on OT law, among other things. Here's a question: have you ever corroborated Mr. G's teachings with Scripture?
As for the reference to 2 Cor. 6:17, that might not have been the best reference, but there are other verses that would prove my point, such as Romans 16:17 "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them."
I know you might find my saying this surprising but here goes: I do not expect perfection of Bill Gothard. I do not expect him to be perfect. He's a sinful human being just like you and me.
That being said, I can give Mr. Gothard, as I would any Christian teacher some leeway. I can have grace for someone who is a "poor teacher." However, is Mr. Gothard a "poor teacher" when he:
1. refuses to listen to reproof and critiques from others?
2.when he has never apologized for teaching something Biblically wrong or recanted it?
3. when he demeans those who disagree with him as spiritually carnal and equates disagreeing with him to disagreeing with God?
Based on those attributes of Mr. G, Alfred, can you honestly say that those are just merely attributes of a "poor teacher?"
I am glad to see your clarification on your definition of sin.
As for your last point, I do not hate Bill Gothard. I don't want to see him destroyed. But because I believe, based on facts, that he is not merely a "poor teacher," according to Scripture, public warnings of false teachers are more than appropriate.
"Here's a question: have you ever corroborated Mr. G's teachings with Scripture? "
It is at times like this where I want to crawl in a hole. Have you been reading any of my responses . . . at any level? You should be able to answer that question one way or the other.
Things I bring up as important to me, however, are often dismissed so that emphasis may be shifted elsewhere. Example being the little discussion in the new "Stolen Treasures" topic. There are huge portions of Scripture that scream the importance of the battle that Christians - not unbelievers - are in, including serious consequences for defeat. Scriptures that tell believers to spare no expense and effort to hit targets that our Lord has given us. When a person wants to focus on "resting in Jesus", they are not interested in verses that talk about "Strive to enter into rest" (Heb. 4:11).
Both are there. I will bet that when the dust clears, not a few reading my comments will shake their heads and talk privately about my legalistic spirit, and how I close my eyes to the grace and rest of Jesus.
Not a problem with corroboration! It is a problem of balance. And tipping to the left is not better than tipping to the right.
Thanks for responding, Alfred.
I know you've attempted to defend Mr. G's views from Scripture on here-I know, I've read your postings before, and if I recall, I even engaged you in a discussion or two on grace.
I may not have phrased my question in the best manner: maybe a better way of putting it is: have you *ever* found any of Mr. G's teachings to be Scripturally lacking?
You say you have researched in Scripture to corroborate Mr. G's teachings with Scripture. If you don't mind my asking kindly: are you allowing Mr. Gothard's teachings to influence your interpretation of Scripture, or are you reading it in the context of proper hermeneutics?
Moving on, I feel like you're focusing on one misphrased question I asked and ignoring the other questions I posed to you. I would appreciate your input on those.
You're right: Scripture does tell us to confront evil. It is a "target" that God gave us to shoot at. But doesn't evil include false teachers as well?
You're right; balance is important. And no, libertinism is not better than legalism, or vice versa. I do have to ask though, are you saying that I or RG am advocating libertinism? If so, what specifically is your reason for saying that?
"have you *ever* found any of Mr. G's teachings to be Scripturally lacking?"
What does that mean, Don? I can't think of a teacher that I would follow down every rabbit trail. The biggest valid compliant about Mr. G is "balance". That is the battle you fight and win or it eats you alive. I do not find anything that rises to the level of heresy.
" are you reading it in the context of proper hermeneutics?"
Do you believe ordinary believers can interpret the essence of Scripture equally well as scholars? If not, what do you base that on, scripturslly?
"are you saying that I or RG am advocating libertinism? If so, what specifically is your reason for saying that?". I don't know. I am bothered a tad with the "big tent" notion that makes all on the journey away from Gothard equal. Grace means never making people unhappy or second guessing their lifestyle choices. Are you one that believes that? I am guessing not.
You referenced other questions. Please aim them back at me if I did not address them
Maybe these were the missing Don comments:
However, is Mr. Gothard a "poor teacher" when he:
1. refuses to listen to reproof and critiques from others?
2.when he has never apologized for teaching something Biblically wrong or recanted it?
3. when he demeans those who disagree with him as spiritually carnal and equates disagreeing with him to disagreeing with God?"
Boy . . . There are so many assumptions in there
1) I agree that he has a lot of confidence . . . But never listen? That is baloney . . . He listens to a lot of people. And, for the record, that was a primary complaint of Martin Luther . . . And of modern politicians that survive. When you stand alone, you better have some inner courage and confidence, or those that oppose will rip you in pieces
2) point me to a leader that you really like that has done what you say. Modern, ancient. I know that has happened, but are you saying this is normal for men and women of God? Are you supposed to change your theology in major ways throughout life?
3) Please point me at examples. I don't see the same man you do. Obviously he has a lot of confidence in what he has gotten from the Lord . . Don't you? I mean, what is your opinion of me, whom you find to be . . . What? Do you find me disagreeing with God as I disagree with you? You see, it only offends when the perspectives are different from one's own.
Alfred,
I have tried to stay polite and courteous with you, but from reading your latest comment, my impression is that you're not showing me the same courtesy.
Regarding your response to my question "have you ever found any of Mr. G's teachings to be spiritually lacking," all I meant was simply that. I am surprised, however, that you don't consider someone who teaches legalistic things that have hurt many people, who defines grace as simply a works-enabling substance, and who brushes off those who have legitimate concerns about said teachings as someone to avoid.
I don't think there is some secret about the Bible to be only interpreted by scholars. IMO, the Bible was written for common people, and meant to be understood by them.
Furthermore, where have I said that everyone is at an equal place in their journey away from Gothard? I'm not totally sure I understand what you mean.
In response to your assertion that my other three questions were "full of assumptions," there are documented cases of people who have confronted Gothard, personnel from Dallas Theological Seminary included. Gothard has either brushed them off, not kept his word in addressing their concerns, or has demeaned them by saying that their problem is with the Bible, not him. No Alfred, those are not assumptions. Those are facts.
Too, calling something I said "baloney" is considered impolite. I have tried not to call names at your arguments, so I would ask that you do the same. However, it is not "baloney," it is fact that either Gothard brushes off concerns or when he does listen, does not follow through on addressing the stated concerns, according to those who have confronted him. My sibling, who is more supportive of ATI and likely so of your positions (and who worked at HQ), has even admitted to me that BG is not very confrontable.
If you want an example of someone who has done what I referred to, I would refer to my dad. No, he isn't perfect, and we have disagreements where I think he's wrong and he thinks I'm wrong. :) But my dad is usually a pretty objective person, and he doesn't demean me as someone who disagrees with God b/c I disagree with him, or one of brushing off concerns.
Hope: Thank you for sharing that. "I still find myself thinking or acting in ways that do not line up with God's Word, but are carry-overs from false teaching in IBLP." Is that in relation to the proper role of "authority", particularly? I do understand that, BTW . . .
Ileata: Do you ever find wisdom in things like "4 Spiritual Laws" . . . and "Four Personality Types" (or whatever that was called) and "Love Languages" and other things that can point to Scripture but are not based on Scripture per se? I know I do . . . counselors talk about "soul bonds" with other people to express the difficulty that some people have in escaping abusive relationships. Or "abuse enablers" . . . Is that in the Bible? Things that come out of practical life, that are consistent with Scripture.
On fears . . . how about this:
"For thus saith the Lord God, the Holy One of Israel;
In returning and rest shall ye be saved;
in quietness and in confidence shall be your strength:
and ye would not.
But ye said, No; for we will flee upon horses;
therefore shall ye flee:
and, We will ride upon the swift;
therefore shall they that pursue you be swift." (Isaiah 30)
"Therefore" appears to be a cause/effect relationship . . . not the fear, but acting on it in opposition to God's command causing the things we fear to materialize. I probably should have left that one alone . . . but . . . I think there is some truth to the concern with what we fear and thus "worship".
Alfred: Straw Man Fallacy
Wes: Pass the popcorn please.
Alfred, {in case you missed it} have you heard of the "straw man fallacy"? Allow me to attempt an explanation.
You are misrepresenting the positions put forth in this article and many articles throughout this website.
To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.
Food for thought.
Alfred, I think I just murdered some brain cells trying to connect that Scripture with the 'interpretation' you just gave. I'm assuming you are suggesting that we are running from God (I mean Gothard), and that our fears are coming true (they aren't) because we're running from a man, STRAIGHT to Jesus? There go a few dozen more brain cells.
Now that I think of it, maybe that Scripture is where Gothard got the idea that females who enjoy horseback riding have a problem with rebellion?
Pass the popcorn indeed.
Well, I suppose I have gotten an extra dose of condescension and sarcasm today! :-)
Like I said, I probably should have left that alone . . . since I remain as puzzled by your reaction as you appear to be to mine. I probably missed your point ... I know Mr. G teaches that fear = worship, and fearing the devil gives him power to enact our fears . . . something like that. The "roaring lion" in 1 Peter 5 is the old, toothless lion who attempts to scare the prey out into the open, where the real enemy - the young, quiet lions, await.
That's what I thought. I am always interested when someone finds a Gothard teaching to be false . . . the last thing I want to do is get embarrassed by something I understood to be correct.
Shucks, Wes . . . the Lord bless you too!
Let me give you an example of a Straw Man...
Wes: I believe the Sky is blue.
Alfred: I believe you're wrong. Blue is not a bad color.
Wes: What??!?
"That's what I thought. I am always interested when someone finds a Gothard teaching to be false . . . the last thing I want to do is get embarrassed by something I understood to be correct."
Great! Then I invite you to comment on any of my articles in the Twisting Scripture section.
I don't mind considering, commenting on anything . . . any chance you might change your mind on anything put forward? I have engaged on "twisty scriptures" on many levels over the years . . . it seems hard to find even an interest in moderating a judgment, a conclusion once rendered.
I am as willing as you are to change my mind. So fire away. Please.
HAHA David, I see what you did there. :)
I am serious though. I await with anticipation (though not much hope) the day that any supported of ATI is willing to tackle specific issues of Mr. Gs teachings and how he uses Scripture.
David: I have been taking such issues up repeatedly . . . all over the forum. You can start with the "Call to Discernment" article, where his biggest issue (I think it was point one) was regarding whether babies had a real spiritual life, being able to take Scripture in before birth. Which was amazing from a "Reformed" pastor, whose doctrine includes babies getting saved in the womb. There was one on "Grace" recently that went on and on and on on what Grace is and is not . . . If you can't find it, I will figure it out.
So . . . if that is your greatest desire, the Lord has answered your prayers. Unless "supported by" means "on staff" . . . which I am not. Just . . . an ATI Dad.
Alfred, it is the articles which deal specifically and at length with Scripture twisting that I am curious why you seem to avoid. All the articles you deal with are personal testimonies or opinion pieces. But, since you state "I am always interested when someone finds a Gothard teaching to be false..." it seems that the articles that deal SPECIFICALLY with this would be the ones you would go to. So, assuming you are being truthful when you state your interest, I look forward to discussing things with you in a more focused setting.
As to the rabbit trail you mention, I must confess that I also find this format to be less the ideal and thus refrain from discussions I would otherwise be glad to have. Given the limitations here I am afraid I will have to stick with issues that are central to where I find Gothard's teachings to be unScriptural. The good thing though of going to the Twisted Scriptures section for discussion is that its not as busy...for some reason :)
David: thanks for your interest in my opinions. I work really hard when I have someone whom I believe to love the Lord with all their heart, regardless of the chasm of difference of opinion.
I will have a look at your section.
On further thought . . . Aim me at your favorite, David. Or favorites. Onevatva time.
I particularly like the series on Sexual Rules as they cover a wide gamut of different types of problems I have with Mr Gs use of Scripture. But feel free to choose any of these if you want to start elsewhere.
https://www.recoveringgrace.org/author/davidm/
Dude, there is a reason you don't get a lot of comments! :-) That is a library volume. At some point the mind glazes over - I remember reading this . . . too much. I know you thought you were showing restraint by publishing in 3 parts . . . 20 parts might have been better.
I am going to comment on "Sexual Rules" . . . I guess I will make my comments offline and then paste in different topics so others can offer their thoughts. Bear with me.
You have no idea how much I didn't say that I could have ;)
You are saying that . . . so me?! :-) Oh, yes, I do so very much understand. I can write a book on every point. Volume meltdown.
OK . . . it was Ileata that said "For example...Gothard taught me that some cosmic force would work to make my fears happen." That was where the fearful thread started. I gave an example of how - in fact - something cosmic, i.e. the Lord, actually said He would make things happen if we fear the wrong entities.
And Wes strawmaned me several places . . . which straw man are you objecting to, sir?
Alfred... Perhaps every other post (50%) you've made on this site sir?
Riddle me this please:
*I require special treatment everywhere I go...
*I'm hyper sensitive to any kind of critique or disagreement...
*I flatter those who admire and affirm me...
*I pretend to be more important than you are...
*I subtly brag about my accomplishments and exaggerate my achievements...
*I'm an expert in many fields yet truly in none...
*I’m more concerned with shame rather than guilt…
*I see my followers as an extension of myself...
Who am I?
I completely understand and appreciate you writing this. Fellow Christians need to know that true damage has been done. A violation has been carried out for perhaps years. Any cult, manipulating, mind-control, or legalistic group can have such deep and far reaching affects on our inner person. We may be set free completely from their grasp and yet it may take years for the wrong teachings and thinking, and the strange feelings we carry with us, to finally stop affecting our minds.
I have been set free from a pernicious gothard-like family for over a decade, but I can sometimes still hear the dogmatic statements from the leader (the mother) and I have to re-evaluate what is in my mind to God's truth. A leader's manipulation can be so subtle.
For example: The simple act of giving gifts. "She" said it was manipulating to give a gift. After being set free, I have had to ask my friends over and over if they are offended by our gifts. These friends have walked through our agony with us these many years. Although they have not ever gone through the agony of what we have, they have been loving and understanding. They have been a gift from God when we have lost what is most precious to us---our adult children to that family.
In this day it may be that few will understand enough to be kind and loving to the wounded among us.
Thanks, Eliza, for sharing.
(((hugs))) Jill!
Eliza-
It is absolutely wonderful to have friends who are supportive of one another in trials, especially since we are supposed to "bear one another's burdens." However, it takes a special kind of friendship to actually hold each other accountable to the Word of God. Often times, we as Christians will go only to those friends who will agree with our opinions, point of view, and beliefs, and veer away from those who we would actually benefit from: the true friends who actually care about the position of our hearts before God.
I am actually acquainted with both Jill and the other "side" of her "agony." I found it a trial to watch her children suffer from the emotional and psychological abuse that Jill and her husband put them through. When her children were brave enough to stand up for themselves, Jill and her husband twisted events and started making up lies and stories. I watched as Jill and her husband efficiently told lies and used manipulative tactics to encourage those around them to accept and feel sorry for themselves rather than learn the truth.
Unfortunately, the other family involved, the mother of which was referred to as "the leader," was persecuted and lied about as well. They had been nothing but compassion and grace to both Jill and her husband's children, and to Jill and her husband themselves. They endured harassment and lies for the sake of trying to help Jill and her husband to face the facts; that they would be accountable to the Lord for how they treated their children and other people. JIll and her husband have a long standing habit of shunning people that disagreed with them. They held and hold themselves up to be authorities on the Bible, without having accountability from anyone. I was deceived by Jill and her husband as well. Jill and her husband consistently insist that they never had done anything wrong, denying actual events witnessed by many people.
I watched as Jill and her husband spread cruel and vicious rumors about the family, and obviously they still do. Jill and her husband were actually the ones who were the "Gothard-like" parents. Their adult children were kept away from others as much as possible, and confused and manipulated by Jill and her husband using twisted scripture. I watched as the adult children came to grow in their scripture knowledge and compassion for others; as they grew in this knowledge, they realized that the legalistic and cruel teachings and actions of Jill and her husband were false. As they came to this realization, Jill and her husband became angry and resentful of any people that were compassionate and helpful, focusing their anger on this other family.
The other family, especially the mother, had only been kindness and compassion. I watched as Jill and her husband twisted and manipulated events until they all but destroyed the reputation of their adult children and the other family. The adult children and the other family kept their mouths closed and refused to talk to many people about the situation in hopes that they could be reconciled with Jill and her husband. I wonder now if they wish that they had told people the facts instead of letting Jill and her husband spread hateful lies without combatting them.
After reading Jill's entry, I was burdened to say something. I want people on this site to consider the fact that even though people have a good story, there might be another side. I can only pray that Jill and her husband repent before the Lord and repent to their adult children and the family that they have so grievously wronged. Jill and her husband were the ones to cut everyone out of their lives and informed them that they never wanted to see them again. The adult children have tried to reconcile with Jill and her husband in the past, and being cast away by Jill and her husband are currently living Godly lives devoted to serving people and growing in the word of God. I have never seen any evidence of them being manipulated by anyone except their own parents.
Jill and her husband's stories sounded really good to a lot of people. I observed and came to know the truth. I certainly wish that I had stood up for the other family and Jill and her husband's kids when I had the chance. May God have mercy on Jill and her husband's souls.
Use discernment and caution when reading blogger replies, even if they are asking for sympathy with a good story. This site can do true good, and it is a shame that people like Jill can get sympathy for false information.
Be careful with manipulation and legalism in disguise- it will poison your souls.
It says in Revelation that there are no liars in heaven. Who is going to love Jill and her husband enough to tell them the truth now so that they can repent before they die?
The computer is eating my replies!!!! I apologize if you get double replies!
How about this? To the idea that "bitterness" (whatever that means.... seriously, when someone says that, all I hear is gibberish, but that's an aside) causes us to become helplessly entangled with the soul of another person, and why can't we just drop a false teaching like a hot potato, even while we sit for years under the influence of the same teaching, waiting to be kicked out... I think we're forgetting something very crucial about the psychological aspect of it all:
"The way we talk to our children, becomes their inner voice. Choose your words carefully."
What I'm trying to say, is that even these teachings have become our inner voice. They were impressed upon us in our formative years, by the people who were most important to us. And far from being static concepts, intrinsic to them was a lot of guilt and manipulation tactics. So it's not as simple as dropping a hot potato, it's more like fighting daily with inner demons, hearing the voice of someone very important to us in our head, someone who should indeed matter to us, and it's a voice that attacks our sense of self in order to gain our compliance.
Extremely well said, Hannah! Exactly that!
[...] A recent article on Recovering Grace, entitled “Moving On,” prompted me to think about the reason it is so difficult to move forward after being victimized by legalism. As I have worked with those hurt by legalism over the years, I have often heard stories about what happened five, ten, maybe thirty years ago. These folks still struggle against the lies they were told and the anger they continue to feel toward those who misused them. I have come to the conclusion that a great deal of the difficulty of moving on has to do with the treasures that were stolen. [...]
Mr. C, you are right on!!!
Some comments were made today that were inconsistent with the spirit we try to maintain here at RG and those have been removed and the individuals messaged to explain. We ask that everyone remember that each human being is made in the image of God and that we strive to speak as we would face to face. This does not mean it will never get heated but it is possible to impassioned and still maintain the level of respect that we request of our members in this particular forum.
Yay! Thanks for monitoring for respect. I didn't read the comments that were removed, but love the reminder to speak as we would to one another as if we were face to face.
But what if you guys are wrong?
If you will take the time to show me where I am wrong I would be glad to discuss it seriously and even retract or clarify if the evidence warrants it. I have done it before. But it takes a lot more than someone just flatly saying I am wrong.
So, what if you are wrong instead?
Name calling comments should be deleted too.. like when peoplecall others legalists
What, specifically, are you referring to? I don't recall anyone ever calling another commenter a legalist on the RG forum. Although I admit I have not read every single comment. But even if they did, "legalist" is more a description of a person's mode of operation, than it is name-calling. It's not even on the same par as "poopyface" or what have you. [Lame example, I know, but the others that came to mind were not printable, here]
John Doe, I see you've made comments that show you think we are wrong, but what I have not seen is evidence and examples of where you think something indicates that. If you expect us to listen to your argument, you must provide evidence to back it up. Otherwise, you make yourself appear uncredible.
Deleting someone's comment because they called someone a legalist means that comments that call RG names and titles like "they are seeking an excuse to avoid following Biblical principles" should be deleted too.
[...] thing that victims of abuse are constantly told is to “forgive and forget” or “move on.” Those phrases are not helpful and actually do more damage to the emotions and healing of [...]
[…] A recent article on Recovering Grace, entitled “Moving On,” prompted me to think about the reason it is so difficult to move forward after being victimized by legalism. As I have worked with those hurt by legalism over the years, I have often heard stories about what happened five, ten, maybe thirty years ago. These folks still struggle against the lies they were told and the anger they continue to feel toward those who misused them. I have come to the conclusion that a great deal of the difficulty of moving on has to do with the treasures that were stolen. […]