47 Comments

1. 

   Becoming Free December 27, 2014 Reply

   Very, very interesting. Thank you for posting this.

2. 

   LynnCD December 27, 2014 Reply

   I've read a good part of the first link. I don't know if at some point the author used the word "fatalism," but that is the faulty assumption I see as Gothard tries to see, as Job's comforters did, what possible reason God has for allowing every evil in a believer's life. I agree that Gothard's principles of design and some other principles are based on how you order the decree of God. In the principle of design God's sovereign control over "the 10 unchangeables" is taught clearly, for example. But when he tries to explain what God is doing in every bad circumstance, for good, such attempts are way beyond his, or yours, or my pay grade. Way beyond.
   
   A book I loved as a child and read several times as an adult, also teaches about God's sovereignty from a Reformed perspective, and that is the lovely book, Heidi. When Heidi, sick with grief for her home in the alps with her Grandfather, said to her adopted Grandmother, in Frankfurt, that she didn't believe in God any more because she prayed (to go home) but God did not answer her prayers, so she gave up praying. The Grandmother explained that God is good, and sometimes withholds what we ask for because He wants to give us something better, in His time. Heidi sees her prayers answered better than what she prayed for, and she, in turn taught this truth to the kind doctor who eventually sent her home from Frankfurt, and came to visit her later on, sick with grief himself for the loss of a loved one.
   
   God's sovereignty must be taught in a relational way. This I learned from the book, Heidi, and I have from time to time mused on this book and Gothard's teaching on God being in charge of everything for our good. God is King, yes. He is sovereign, yes. He works all things for good for those who love Him and are called according to His purposes, yes. He is also our Abba(Daddy), and our Shepherd. We are His sheep, His children, His Bride. Gothard's teaching leaves this relational aspect out and is taught in a mechanistic way, and he makes too much of trying to discern every aspect of God's good reasons, but I repeat myself.

3. 

   rob war December 27, 2014 Reply

   All I can say is WOW! What an incredible, complete, accurate and even prophetic analysis. After reading the whole thing, I end up with more questions than answers. The questions are:
   1. Why wasn't this more widely known after being published?
   2. Why didn't more pastors read this, especially the ones that supported the seminar?
   3. Did RG just come across this gold mine?
   Again, I thank RG for publishing this. I have found this to be the best 1970's analysis yet. I really wish it was more widely read and even heeded back then. I still don't understand why more pastors and theologians couldn't have seen a number of things that are obvious and pointed out in the thesis. I am certainly going to go back and reread this again and again. There is so much there to chew on.
   What I liked best about was the idea that IBYC was more about conflict avoidance than real conflict resolution. The tie in with reformed theology and views on suffering and predestination really just scratch the surface. Again WOW!

   • 

     Mark R December 29, 2014 Reply

     Theses generally don't get a lot of publicity once published, since their intended target is not the general public, but the academic community.
     
     Also in the day, when "challenging authority" was all the rage, pastors were happy for ANYONE who would teach the need to submit to authority.
     
     The latter is especially true within one group--the independent fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) movement--that has historically been supportive of Gothard. Having studied the IFB movement, its support of Gothard (and rejection of criticism) is not surprising given two key aspects of the movement:
     1. IFB churches are highly personality driven. The pastor is often an autocrat who controls every aspect of the church. The deacons are usually hand-picked (any "church vote" is little more than mere formality; anyone who opposes is quickly shunned and run off) and now it is frequent that the founding pastor's son or son-in-law now runs the congregation. Anyone who teaches complete submission to authority is highly respected, since that's what the pastor wants--mere "sheeple" who "see no more than the pastor wants them to see, says nothing but what the pastor wants them to say, and does nothing but what the pastor wants them to do" (to paraphrase the WWII clip "Education for Death).
     2. The group is also highly insular. Unless it comes out of an "approved" college (Bob Jones, Pensacola Christian, etc.) it won't be accepted. And more so if it involves psychology, which IFB's tend to dismiss out of hand as "secular humanism".

     • 

       Don Rubottom December 29, 2014 Reply

       Great thoughts, Mark. I find it very interesting that a significant "King James Only" crowd bought into BG's principles proof-texted with paraphrases (Living, Phillips) inconsistent with KJV! How often we find what we want to find, seeing what we want to see. May God have mercy on us all.

     • 

       rob war December 29, 2014 Reply

       Thanks Mark, I am quite aware of the support and connection to IFB group especially after reading "I Fired God" which is a very tough read. Bill's seminars played heavily in that book. While IFB became the core base, there were many more that participated in the seminars in the 1970s. From my angle, I was participating in an independent Charismatic Church that was influenced by the sheparding movement. While that doesn't seem to fit with IFB types, Bill did seem to have a wide appeal in the Charismatic movement. I think the Hobby Lobby family considers themselves Pentacostal. I am beginning to wonder if a majority of those attending in the 1970s were from unaffliated, non-denominational type of Churches whether that be Baptist or Charismatic and those pastors well meaning and sincere needed something that was authoritative to send their people to to fill the void of a lack of teaching, catechesis, confessional material found in denominational churches.

     • 

       GuyS December 29, 2014 Reply

       Rob War, "While that doesn't seem to fit with IFB types, Bill did seem to have a wide appeal in the Charismatic movement." I agree. I was also involved with the Shepherding Movement (SM). You are correct that from an outsiders perspective, it would be hard to understand the common attraction for such different backgrounds to be under one tent. ( I hope I am summarizing correctly) One reason was that many in the SM knew they were lacking major pieces of the Kingdom of God. Thus, I think it was easy to look to BG for answers (since he promised answers to about everything.) I am sure there are many other and better explanations others can share.

       • 

         rob war December 30, 2014

         I think you answered it very well. I think Bill's authority teaching was very similar to the authority teaching in the shepherding movement and thus the promotion and attendance.

     • 

       Skylark December 30, 2014 Reply

       Actually, the I in IFB stands for independent - that means they're all different and cannot be painted with the same brush. Perhaps some are personality cults, but many (most?) certainly are not. Also, the IFB churches I am familiar with have either never heard of Gothard or actively do not support him - and have not since long before RG came on the scene.

       • 

         rob war December 30, 2014

         yes, not all IFB Churches are supportive of BG. My sister's Church is loosely affiliated with IFB and is nothing at all like what is described in "I Fired God". Yes, they are KJV only but I don't think they are not connected with BJU and my brother-in-law is a deacon.

     • 

       GuyS December 30, 2014 Reply

       Skylark, thanks for your comments. I have never been involved with IFB. I was involved with the SM for about 10 years and from what you described about the independent thing, that rings true for the SM. We had some common beliefs of course. But there were wide differences in local groups. True we listened to the same "big 5" (on audio cassette tapes) and read "New Wine Magazine." Looking back on it, we were fairly disconnected from any real meaningful Christian community, outside our local group. Others may have had different experiences.

       • 

         rob war December 30, 2014

         New Wine magazine. I remember reading that every month cover to cover. Wow, what memories. The Fort Lauderdale five did eventually split and renounce what they taught.

       • 

         GuyS December 30, 2014

         Rob War, if you want a blast from the past, here is a link to some (all?) of the New Wine Magazine:
         http://www.csmpublishing.org/res_newWine.php

       • 

         rob war December 31, 2014

         Thanks Guy, unlike mr Bill here, the Fort Lauderadale five eventually split up and I think 4 of them renounced what they had taught and lead others to believe. They were willing to humble themselves and admit they taught error. Likewise, I do not believe that any one of them had sex scandals or even financial issues like Mr Bill.

4. 

   P.L. December 27, 2014 Reply

   "…I woke up during that IBYC when [Gothard] announced to 20,000 that an 8 year old’s molestation was God’s inoculation against sexual sin."
   
   What the...??? I hadn't heard this information, and my head just exploded. There should have been a rush to the exits as discerning Christians shocked by that statement recognized a false teacher and got away from him as fast as they could, just as Scripture instructs them to do. ("Have nothing to do with such", 2 Timothy 3:5).
   
   How sad that of the 20,000 people in attendance, just this one bore witness to Gothard's apostasy (at least in this case). That auditorium must have been full of itching, undiscerning ears tuned to the voice of a spirit that was not of God.
   
   Thank you, Bryen.

   • 

     Sue December 30, 2014 Reply

     P.L.
     
     I'm with you. Idk either but it would have spared a generation.
     
     The burden is ours to be true Bereans.

5. 

   Dave December 28, 2014 Reply

   "Faith, is in large part, defined as the degree of belief the student places in Gothard's teaching."
   
   "We define the standard by which we dictate what conditions God must meet in order to be considered God."
   
   I would LOVE to spend an afternoon with this man! Give him an overhead projector and put him in Thompson Boling Arena!!!

6. 

   Dave December 28, 2014 Reply

   As a follow-up.
   
   RG - Will you make this available for purchase in book form?

7. 

   Don Rubottom December 28, 2014 Reply

   I fear that the answer to 'WHY' pastors and theologians did not perceive and respond appropriately is that they are not really that well trained and not necessarily spiritually discerning. For very many, seminary is a place where an informed faith encounters faithless information. Degrees, titles, positions and reputation drive much of the professional world of theology and 'clergy'. We expect our pastors to interpret the Word for us and do not take responsibility for the 20 versions of the Bible we have in our homes. We are then limited by their own shallow relationship with God.
   The 'professionalism' may have reached its maximum in the late 60's after the WWII generation was fully entrenched and the next generation was entering into 'the ministry'. The Truth of Scripture was lost in the universities by the twenties making those two generations the first taught in America with an open contempt for inerrancy, historicity, miracles, virgin birth, resurrection and the divinity of Christ.
   Part of Gothard's charm was his greater certainty than these weak-believing 'pastors' could convey. And they, though jealous of his success, were success-oriented, so they would not argue with 20,000 people in an auditorium, even if they mocked the teaching privately. They just wanted to enjoy the increased commitment of their flock, regardless of its faulty basis. No one argued with success. It was its own validation.
   Human. Weak. False. As others have stated, Natural Religion.

   • 

     rob war December 28, 2014 Reply

     Don,
     I appreciate your response. I guess I do not quite share the negative analysis. While growing up in a more "liberal" united Methodist Church, I would say that basic Christian doctrine like the virgin birth would have been questioned, even in their seminaries. But more mainstream and liberal Christians were not the ones attending IBYC seminars. It was the more "Bible" believing type of Churches. It also included a number of independent Churches that were heavily influenced by the sheparding and discipleship movement which I ended up attending after leaving UM. The pastor of that Church went to Gorman-Cromwell, he was very well versed in Greek and taught from what the Greek words meant etc. I think the draw from him and the leadership there was the authority teaching which matched what was promoted in the sheparding movement of the 1970's. Now, I still repect and admire this Pastor, I believe he was and still is a Godly man and pastor. I don't think there is an easy answer as to why more pastors didn't question or see through a number of things that Bill taught. I would have expected Bill's following and promoting of OT diet laws etc would have raised more alarm bells. But that was buried in the seminar that by the time Thursday rolled around, one was already drawn into what Bill was teaching. I think the earlier years of keeping his material secret and handing it out night by night did keep more pastors away from examining the material.

     • 

       Don Rubottom December 29, 2014 Reply

       Rob, thanks for adding balance to my diatribe. BTW, I meant "uniformed faith meets faithless information". Many of the fundamentalist pastors did not get great seminary teaching but even SBC seminaries were going liberal by the 70's. My point was that intellectualism got in the way of training pastors. Methodist churches did supply some Gothard attendees who were looking for that certainty that their pastors did not offer.
       God certainly has supplied many exceptions to the trends that destroy. The pastor your mentioned is clearly one. Your point about the "secret" materials is also very important. That alone should have caused men of integrity to question. But pastors were too busy with their own stuff to be concerned.
       I'm not sure the IBLP movement divided churches as much until after ATI took root and BG began to promote more separation. If it had been as divisive in the 70's, more pastors would likely have stood up, simply to save their numbers.

       • 

         GuyS December 29, 2014

         Don, thanks for your "diatribe" :-) Of course I do not see it that way. I find myself looking forward to reading your thoughts. So many times what you say is how I feel but have not expressed it myself. As I continue to read and process here on RG, I find a new ability to express myself. So very cool!
         
         Just want you do know your part in this healing RG and Don.

8. 

   J.B. December 28, 2014 Reply

   I'm still making my way through the entire document, but I thought this portion of the summation of Gothard's view of Job from Chapter 2 stood out:
   
   "Job had a wrong attitude toward the man-in-the-street. Instead of desiring to have a spiritual ministry in the lives of other men, he evaluated them only in terms of their usefulness to his 'Organization,' working with his herds..."
   
   I can think of someone who exhibited that outlook, but it sure isn't Job.

9. 

   Deb December 28, 2014 Reply

   thompson-boling ARENA, SAD MEMORIES AND FLASHBACKS AT THE THOUGHT.

10. 

    David Bryen December 28, 2014 Reply

    An earlier event in my life set the stage to understand the abuse Gothard would continue to heap on his followers. My father, a minister, died from a heart attack when I was 15. I was away from home that summer when my aunt ran across the hay field tears streaming down her face and told me that dad died that morning. All I could do was cry as I packed my clothes to take a two day bus trip back home. The pastor of the church came over to counsel me in my grief. He pulled out his Bible, opened it up and read: "For me to live is Christ, to die is gain."
    
    "Where is your father now David?"
    
    "In heaven of course."
    
    "If your dad is in heaven with Jesus, why in the world would you cry?" He threw a couple other verses at me but assured me that "All things work together for good."
    
    To a 15 year old spiritually alert youth, how could I argue with the Bible and the authority of the pastor? I stopped crying and didn't cry on the way home, cry at the funeral, or cry when the members of the church wailed at his casket. It wasn't until I was writing my thesis that I found myself pounding on the typewriter keys, tears flowing like a river, furious at the "theology" that had robbed me of what could have been a normal grief process. I realized that my truncated grief came about because the Bible had been misused to condemn the normal psychological process of mourning.
    
    I wish that he had quoted me "Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted." Then maybe I would not have buried my grief and caused so many problems in my family. It is the selective application of passages from Scripture based on the pastor's own limited perspective that causes so many problems.

    • 

      rob war December 28, 2014 Reply

      Wow, again that is a powerful testimony. Reading that made me think of all the other Bible verses that would have supported someone's natural reaction and grief. Jesus wept, the shortest verse in the Bible at the tomb of Lazarus. Jesus knew He was going to raise him from the dead yet, Jesus still identified with all the pain and crying that He even wept. Likewise, when Jacob died back in Genesis, they had a month long mourning process and procession, even though he was old and lived a full life. When Joseph was finally reuinted with Jacob, the Bible records him laying down across Joseph's lap and weeping. I think of the verse that "He numbers all our tears". What sick advice to be exposed to at such an crucial age. It explains how you were able to see through Bill way before others.

      • 

        David Bryen December 29, 2014 Reply

        All too often a Bible verse is throw at someone in emotional distress in order to quiet the emotion. If the Bible verse thrower has not embraced their own capacity to endure the emotional realities of life they leave the emotional content and replace it with some form of mental denial and call it "faith." In other words Faith = ability to deny feelings rather that one's faith being able to support someone through the disturbing times of life. Again, I wish that people that listen to anyone purporting to teach "truth" first examine the emotional health and balance of the speaker before they grant the speaker/preacher a position of authority. One theologically trained needs the balance of heart training as well.

        • 

          rob war December 29, 2014

          Thanks again David. I am wondering how your thesis was received at Trinity? What makes me ask is that you make a very good case and correlation with Reformed (Calvinistic) theology and its views on predestination and suffering. I think we can look and pick easily apart at a number of things Bill taught but going after his theological foundation and view of God is what is most crucial in my mind. I would think what you wrote about would have made someone there uncomfortable because it would go to the heart of the theology being taught there.

        • 

          Lindsey December 31, 2014

          David,
          Thank you for sharing this. I can really relate.

11. 

    Tom Baker December 28, 2014 Reply

    I was in Indiana Oct 13 2001 at the Institute. I drove my wife and 7 children there from California. I had cheated on my wife and she decided she wanted to go there. I left her there with 5 of my 7 children and took a train back to CA with 2 of my children several days later. We flew back for Christmas and my daughter decided to stay there. In January I knew there was no hope of getting back together unless my son joined them so I put him on a train. A week after he got there they put in some sort of work camp and he ended up in Arkansas.
    My daughter ended up in Michigan part of a group that was getting some personal training on some 49 principles.
    I remember explaining to him on the phone what father in there right mind wouldn't want his daughter with him and no matter how great the spiritual training he was able to offer.
    I also told him I believed music was just a form of expression whether it was patriotism, worship, love, sadness, or whatever emotion. He didn't agree it was either God's or Satan's. I had peace in my heart after I hung up knowing what I actually believed.
    There is way more to tell from my side and my older children each have their own story to tell. As i write this I am getting angry guess i still have work to do.
    I will tell you my sister flew from Florida to Arkansas and (kidnaped),there words when i got the phone call or rescued him from the work group. He essentially ran away.
    I still believe in God and yes I know what James says about believing. My son brought this sight to my attention guess he still has issues too.
    i think if I person wants to serve join the US ARMY not Bill's Army or become a Dr or just be the person God made you. Tom Baker

    • 

      Don Rubottom December 29, 2014 Reply

      Tom. Thanks for sharing. We can pray for your family as we do for one another here.

    • 

      Sue December 30, 2014 Reply

      Tom hang in there with the rest of us, we are all growing and healing and repenting. Let Him lead you one day at a time. It's what we all need, your welcome here.

12. 

    Don Rubottom December 29, 2014 Reply

    Just finished chapter 2. Excellent analysis and perceptiveness. It is interesting as well how this piece reflects a post WWII liberalism that saw Christianity as a book of answers to social problems just as Gothard saw it as a book of answers to personal problems. The Smart quote at the end of ch. 2 is plain and simple Christian socialism (a soft Marxism), presuming that "captitalism" causes high prices for the poor and individualism causes racism. The final sentence is telling: "...the whole of God is concerned with the whole of man in the whole of life..." (Somehow, it is always the other guy's philosophy that causes problems, never man's sinful nature.)
    But what if the Bible was about God and His Goodness, rather than man and his needs? What if it is about Eternity rather than this life? What if it is about communing Oneness rather than healthy wholeness. If so, both BG and the social liberals are similarly misguided.

13. 

    Don Rubottom December 29, 2014 Reply

    After reading the final installment, these thoughts are foremost:
    Is it a correct summation of Gothardism that "submission is the state of mind or heart that creatively accepts everything in life as God's tool used in His wisdom"? I think that was very well put at the end of chapter 3. If so, it would be very interesting for some well-informed person (of which I am not) to compare and contrast Gothardism with Buddhism and Stoicism.
    I feel even more screwed up seeing how much of BG's philosophy has destroyed my own ambitions and constrained me to avoid making decisions that might alter my circumstances.
    The absence of a living, loving, nurturing, redeeming Christ in Gothard's "system" is overwhelming.
    Is "true success" being like Him or Knowing Him intimately? What did the serpent promise in the Garden?

14. 

    David Pigg December 29, 2014 Reply

    I need help in knowing reformed theology.What is it?David R.Bryen,what a fantastic job you have done in this exhaustive report.Like many theological summaries,one has to read it again and again to get one's mind wrapped around it.There is something about Hodge's comment on page 15,Theological assumptions and evaluations,"Nothing can occur that was not foreseen and if foreseen,it must have been intended."Bryen absolutely relays Gothard's harsh edict that distances him from any compassion for victims of catastrophies and violence linking God as actively in a way more than passively allowing evil to occur,for the sake of inward conformity to the character of Jesus.Slowly Gothard takes his chisel and chips away at the character of God until when the seminar is over,God becomes reinvented.This picture of a hand and chisel is not God but Gothard,rather cruelly making God's heart into stone.On page 55 in the chapter,"hermeneutical assumptions",Gothard subtilly places Christ as too distant to abide in,but through Jesus'discoveries of the secrets of life principles as Gothard would relate and interpret to us,we can live successful lives.We, not as Christ's sheep but as Gothard's are herded into arid pastures,to be automatons of emotional,and spiritual abuse,encouraged to see in our passivity evil and good somewhat indistinguishable.Then Gothard takes natural religion,"you get out of it what you put into it","this works 100 percent of the time",and plays on our adamic nature to become "outward successes".Pride,self righteousness,to castigate failures,will inevitably come.Thirty two hours of red book worthlessness,channeled into a caste system of false, fallen and pagan authority.

    • 

      rob war December 29, 2014 Reply

      reformed theology is the theology of John Calvin. Wikipedia does have a very good article that explains it under "Calvinism". That is the predominate theology in one form or another in evangelicalism. The wikipedia article does go into predestination which is what David was pointing out as a basis for Bill's views on suffering and it's reasons and in an extreme form this can make God out to be the author of evil, suffering and pain.

      • 

        David Pigg December 30, 2014 Reply

        Thank you Don.Thanks for the article David.Guess if this article would be published back then,due to the momentum of Gothard's popularity,the books would be thrown away.Wilfred Bockelmann's "Bill Gothard,The Man and His Ministry", come to my mind.Forty thousand copies were destroyed not even put on a shelf,because the author was critical of Bill Gothard,and the bookstores would not take the chance against popular opinion.Guess I'd rather pay 4.50 or so than pay with my life which I did.

        • 

          MatthewS December 30, 2014

          That was a very good and careful book (Bockelman's). It's a shame that it was not distributed more widely.

        • 

          rob war December 30, 2014

          you can still get used copies of the book on Amazon very inexpensively. I thought the book mirrored Dave's thesis here. Both looked at Bill's theology and view of God.

      • 

        Don Rubottom December 31, 2014 Reply

        It seems to me (came to Reformed PCA church in the late 90's) that the focus on "reformed" theology in the 60's and 70's (era of this article) was on an extreme view of sovereignty and pre-destination. I believe that the Dutch and others in the Reformed tradition have retained a far deeper systematic, covenantal theology than that preserved by mainstream Presbyterianism. PCA types tried to teach me "covenant theology" with no effect until I studied the Theology of the Body supplemented by Michael Horton (Introduction to Covenant Theology). Now I see the Reformed faith as strongly emphasizing the work, works and purposes of God after being first formed in Methodist and Baptist traditions that focused on "my" choice of Jesus. Today I embrace His election and claim no credit whatsoever for my relationship with Him. It is a Gift.
        Different cultural conditions bring out differing emphases in both a tradition and its critics. Ours is a different culture than the one in which the article is written.
        I read Bryen's thesis as saying that Gothard took the Reformed emphasis on God's Sovereignty to an extreme form of fatalism. (Voltaire mocked such fatalism in Candide almost 300 years ago.) This error is as old as man.
        What is especially weird about Gothard is the other side of his unique coin: my guilt accounts for all my disappointment, even though God controls everything. It makes you crazy.

        • 

          GuyS January 7, 2015

          Don, "... my guilt accounts for all my disappointment, even though God controls everything. It makes you crazy."
          
          I love this analysis. It is so true. It is so true in so many of BG's teachings. It is has been hard for me to express this. How can you explain something clearly, that makes you crazy. It seems to me that whenever BG can twist and pervert, he will. Anything to cause more guilt. Therefore we need answers (apart from Christ) that only BG can provide. These answers look Christ centered, but it is only to get you ensnared. The answers and list and rules are dreamed up by BG to enslave the unaware. Thank's Don for your comment.

15. 

    J.B. January 6, 2015 Reply

    I finally finished reading through this. David, this is an excellent analysis of the core issues that have been at the root of IBLP / IBYC since its inception, as this was published before the 1980 scandal, the birth of the ATI program, etc. RG staff, thank you for sharing it and making it available as well.
    
    It's become even more evident from this analysis that IBLP's primary concern was trying to create the most "effective" life possible. Even Gothard's painting of Jesus as "successful" and a person who "discovered the secrets of life" runs so antithetical to what Jesus emphasized in his dealings with people.

    • 

      rob war January 7, 2015 Reply

      Yes, reading David's analysis, some of it reminded me of Pat Robertson's book "The Secret Kingdom" which is similarly a success in life oriented book. I also don't think Pat Robertson ever condemned Bill Gothard in any of his 700 Club shows like Pat did towards the shepherding movement. What also is curious is how Bill came to the type of theology that he had after going to Wheaton College. Wheaton College is the standard of evangelical Christianity with root both in the Wesleyan tradition and reformed type tradition from the abolitionist movement. Bill seemed to end up in the fundamentalist movement with wide support from BJU types. Since the seminars started as an evening class at Wheaton, has there ever been any type of comment about Bill Gothard from Wheaton college and the powers that be there?

16. 

    rob war March 5, 2016 Reply

    Came across this quote:
    "The true solutions are not those which we force upon life in accordance with our theories, but those which life itself provides for those who dispose themselves to receive truth. Consequently, our task is to dissociate ourselves from all who have theories which promise clear cut and infallible solutions and to mistrust all such theories not in a spirit of negativism and defeat, but rather trusting life itself, and nature and if you will permit me God above all".
    Thomas Merton "The Behavior of Titans" 1961

    • 

      Karen March 6, 2016 Reply

      Love that quote, Rob! True joy and freedom in Christ come from this discovery--though, paradoxically, it is not a discovery we typically make until we have been forced by Reality to come to the end of our own resources. Then in our utter dejection and weakness, we encounter Christ, and discover that it is in our weakness we are made truly strong in Him (though in a way diametrically opposed to what the world views as strength!).

      • 

        rob war March 6, 2016 Reply

        Thank-you, you rephrased it very well. It is the total opposite of Bill rigid formulas and answers. Tom Zampino posted this on his blog "Grace Pending: observations on a faith in progress". I thought it was brilliant.

17. 

    David March 7, 2016 Reply

    Are updates on the case as it unfolds available on any other website?
    
    Where are things currently as far as the attempts to disqualify Gibbs III?