The James MacDonald White Paper: Cult 101; Post 8 of 20
Authentic Reformed theology is always destined to bear the fruit of cultism to some degree. Ideology doesn’t always play itself out to its full potential in every person or organization, but the possibility is always there.
Moses addressed the core issue with the Israelites more than 3000 years ago:
Deuteronomy 29:29 – “The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.
Ancient paganism was founded on the idea that the masses were unenlightened in regard to understanding reality. Only an elite few are supposedly capable of gaining true knowledge. And of course, therefore, the unenlightened should follow the elite accordingly for the betterment of mankind as a whole. This approach can be seen clearly in some of the oldest religions known to man like Hinduism which has a defined caste system. However, some variation of that caste system permeates the vast majority of religions and evangelical denominations.
Moses stated plainly that some knowledge is in fact secret, but God holds mankind responsible for a body of knowledge that is revealed. Every person born into the world is personally responsible for that knowledge. This really isn’t the norm in religion which posits the idea that EVERYTHING is secret and unknowable to the masses (Gnosis: secret knowledge). Hence, the masses need to follow the orthodoxy of the enlightened ones which is separate from the reality/truth they are unable to understand. The elite understand—we never will, so we need to trust orthodoxy. For years I could not understand my experience as a Southern Baptist until I understood this concept. A blind person can see the mentality in that denomination that the pastorate understands things that the majority of congregants will never understand.
But Moses stated….
Deuteronomy 30:11 – “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 14 But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.
The definition of a cult usually pertains to a charismatic leader exercising control over a group of people. Obviously, this follows the logic of spiritual elitism, and control follows the logic of orthodoxy. Every behavior pattern coming out of the New Calvinism movement is directly driven by this construct. The examples are too numerous to even catalog, but the most glaring is the idea that no matter how crazy things get, the parishioners need to “trust the elders who are responsible before God for your souls.”
Cultism is behavior. It is the fruit, not the root. The root is spiritual caste, what Moses preached against. The tree is orthodoxy, the fruit is cultism. That’s why Harvest Bible Chapel follows the insanity of James MacDonald. That is why I get emails about MacDonald’s infamous “5 Things….” sermon like, “No words,” and “Wha, wha, wha?”
Much of the present-day American church is built on spiritual caste, and the resulting cultism is leading to a mass exodus, but those fleeing must remember that we are still responsible for what God has revealed. Nobody has to obtain that knowledge for us, it is near us, and in us. All bets are not off because the spiritual elitists have failed.
It is our duty to build something new out of the rubble. We are still accountable before God.
paul
The Grave Danger of Gospel Contemplationism
Hitler never really hid his intentions; nevertheless, when the truth came out the world was horrified. That’s because people didn’t pay close attention to his words, and assumed he really didn’t mean what he seemed to be saying. Hence, when New Calvinists say that “ALL REALITY” is interpreted by the gospel, we assume they don’t really mean, you know, “all” reality. But they do. The following link is to a Dr. Phil show. The doctor is incredulous that ” Raylynn” fell for, and believed the ridiculous antics of cult leader Curly Thornton for nine years (this is an amazing study). But what the good doc doesn’t understand is that Cult 101 is about the interpretation of reality; a lost art and emphasis in our day, especially in the church. Multitudes of New Calvinist parishioners witness behavior that clearly contradicts the plain sense of Scripture, so why do they condone it? “We trust the elders; they are the ones who can most often see the situation in its ‘gospel context.'” Cults always hijack the epistemology; again, that’s Cult 101. The link follows. This woman is not stupid, she was brainwashed into interpreting reality subjectively. After that, anything is possible.
Link to the Dr. Phil show: http://www.drphil.com/shows/show/1948
paul
Clearcreek’s Russ Kennedy and Southwood’s Jean Larroux III: The Divine Right of Philosopher Kings
Though in the title, Jean Larroux, pastor of the gutted Southwood Presbyterian Church (the subject of several articles here at PPT), has little to do with the crux of the issue to be discussed here. This post is in response to some requests by Southwood members to divulge information I have concerning alleged indiscretions unbecoming of a pastor. I obtained the information through an email by a person who identified _____-self. The information has been vetted and is credible for several reasons. I have not re-contacted the sender of the email, but could probably obtain even more confirmation points if deemed necessary. Where I am going with this will require the laying of some groundwork. Clearcreek Chapel in Springboro, Ohio will supply some additional and helpful examples.
“Cult” is a word that is thrown around quite a bit in Christian circles, but in reality, for good reason. The essence of a cult is CONTROL. Cultwatch.com posits this definition of a cult:
The modern definition of a mind control cult is any group which employs mind control and deceptive recruiting techniques. In other words cults trick people into joining and coerce them into staying.
Cultism dates back to the cradle of civilization and is part and parcel with a basic concept that forms the philosophical infrastructure of all false religious groups. It begins with the presupposition that the masses are spiritually incompetent, and that preordained individuals are selected by God, the universe, or some other higher power to rule the masses on the behalf of that entity. Determinism is almost always a mainstay in said presupposition.
In the Platonist construct (which replaced mythology in these systems with a more scientific approach), the philosopher kings rule, the soldiers enforce the will of the kings (father [entity] knows best), and the masses are the producers who’s sum and substance of life is for the predetermined good of society as a whole. And the philosopher kings know best how to bring that about. And therefore, they should RULE the masses.
If at all possible, philosopher kings will use the sword and fear to keep the process running smoothly, but mind control, brainwashing, and indoctrination will always be present as the staple modus operandi. Such reduces the need for the sword, but the sword has the final say if necessary. The authority of the philosopher kings to send you to hell for eternity is also a strong incentive to live for the group or the whole, which is the “vision of the good.” So, job one is CONTROL.
This is the staple doctrine of EVERY religion that operates apart from truth, capital T. So, wherever truth is not practiced in religion, there is going to be a strong cultish feel in the mix. From a pure biblical perspective, the word is SECT, or SECTARIAN. These are groups who divide with UNTRUTH. So, a strong, very strong element of the cultish motif is lots of division. While cults maintain an operative core, it is at the expense of relationships and other human infrastructures. AND, the primary focus of the philosopher kings—where most of their energies will always be expended, is in maintaining CONTROL—leading to the cultish aura. Hence, “Hey Paul, we are going to this you fill in the blankchurch and I know this sounds crazy, but I think it’s a cult.” I don’t doubt it a bit. ANY system based on the spiritually enlightened ruling over the incompetent masses WILL have the cultish aura.
With all of that said, what about the moral fitness of the philosopher kings? Well, that depends on the particular gargantuan-faceted variances of this ancient principle, but for the most part, the moral fitness of the philosopher king is irrelevant. And throughout history, those who think otherwise and are vocal about it have become a rare breed. Ever heard of a guy named John the Baptist? Especially in Reformed circles where we are all totally depraved “sinners saved by grace,” and all being captive passengers on the Love Slime Boat, integrity doesn’t have relevance in regard to the spiritual caste system needed to lead the totally depraved safely to heaven. Those who don’t get it are mercilessly slaughtered for the sake of the group and the wellbeing of the whole. In America where John the Baptist types can’t be burned at the stake, hanged, or beheaded; slander, bogus church discipline, character assignation, and false criminal charges attempt to fill the gap in silencing detractors. Furthermore, antinomianism may be the very doctrine of the philosopher king to begin with. This reality is known as the divine right of kings:
The divine right of kings, or divine-right theory of kingship, is a political and religious doctrine of royal and political legitimacy. It asserts that a monarch is subject to no earthly authority, deriving the right to rule directly from the will of God. The king is thus not subject to the will of his people, the aristocracy, or any other estate of the realm, including (in the view of some, especially in Protestant countries) the Church. According to this doctrine, only God can judge an unjust king. The doctrine implies that any attempt to depose the king or to restrict his powers runs contrary to the will of God and may constitute a sacrilegious act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_right_of_kings).
Therefore, the formula: higher power >+ enlightened proxy rulers >+ totally depraved = spiritual caste system = control = cultism = sectarianism = tyranny.
Let’s talk about the operative core that philosopher kings/pastors/elders are able to keep intact. Many people are inclined towards cult atmospheres. Some people are just there for the social community of it all. They like the people, the parties, the events etc. Many people there may be of the same cultural mindset as well. TRUTH is low priority—they hold to the doctrine of the leaders for the sake of community. A second group to consider are those who are simply adverse to change. Normality and business as usual is very important to them. Things would have to get pretty crazy before change would be considered. There is also a group that will follow whatever is placed in front of them. They simply have no discernment. Some know things aren’t right, but have been brainwashed into thinking that there isn’t anything better out there. Besides, to leave would also be admitting to complicity in unjust things that took place; things that are spawned by sectarianism. Finally, there are those who have totally bought into the doctrine. Dissenters who care enough about the truth to raise concerns are disposed with in one of several aforementioned methods.
But the bottom line is the following: churches that function by a caste system are in continual damage control mode. Everything else is window dressing. Real ministry is not taking place. The elders spend all of their time indoctrinating. Again, CONTROL is job one. Sermons are not focused on Scriptural life-wisdom—the focus is indoctrination for control purposes. There is going to be a constant tension, and one reason for this follows:
The written word of God poses a huge problem for the religious caste systems that have plagued the world from the beginning of time—the spiritual elite ruling the masses on God’s behalf via supposed direct revelation and authority. As church historian John Immel notes: The problem is that God is not standing there beside them and confirming His agreement. Or is He? The superintended life manual of God, and its availability to the masses poses a huge problem for those who wish to rule over men: God is telling us what He is telling them, and the tendency is to think God knows more than they do.
And it is clear that God’s word speaks to the individual. The books of the Old Testament and the letters of the New address the whole congregation of the saints. Yes, there are leaders among God’s people, but they are obviously very accountable. There are no closed board meetings between God and church leaders. Luke wrote two letters, really a book in two parts, for the benefit of one person. Why? “….that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught” (Paul Dohse: False Reformation; p. 97, TANC Publishers 2012).
This is where Clearcreek Chapel, the church that incited my journey into these matters, supplies a helpful example. The leadership of that church is in constant damage control mode. Their sermon and teaching modules are continually focused on indoctrination and authority. Even when I was last there (circa 2006), there was a climate of fear. Often, their choice of sermon topics are driven by the latest challenges to their doctrine. Apparently, the last episode was in September of this year, prompting a sermon series entitled, “Biblical Authority at The Chapel”:
And, I want to dispel one false, wicked slander about us and churches like us. We do not believe or teach or require absolute, unquestioning submission to the leadership of this church. Whatever you have been told; whatever bad experience you have had elsewhere, I plead with you to listen this morning to God’s word. So in what I am going to say this morning, I am trying to hover close to the Bible and build a Biblical understanding of authority in God’s Kingdom. Tonight, Pastor Dale will help us think about how we take these precepts, principles and patterns and institute Biblical governance and guidance in the church. [and at the pm service: “A recent criticism has been leveled that we at Clearcreek Chapel engage in some sort of Christian mysticism.”].
No? They insist on “absolute, unquestioning submission” to “biblical authority.” BUT, they are the only ones that can properly interpret it! What’s the difference? As noted in the new publication of False Reformation (pp.110,111), another elder at Clearcreek plainly stated that personal study was only a supplement to efficacious elder preaching, and that the word came from God to the elders, then to the parishioner—back to the word, and then back to God with faith being the result. Clearly, the elders and the word are between the believers and God:
You think, perhaps, that [you] can fill up the other half of the plate with personal study, devotions, or quiet times, or a radio program. Beloved, you cannot. Scripture is relatively quiet on such practices. But on preaching, the case is clear and strong. Neglect preaching and neglect your soul. I know that some are kept from services for legitimate reasons which are out of their control, but I doubt that is the case for most. I beseech you, change your ways for the good of this people and for the good of your own selves. Give the Word its rightful place. As I have often said, there is no better place you could be than here, under the preaching of the Word.
The text here implies that there was an interactive nature between three entities: The preacher, the hearers, and the Word. Note this cycle: Paul, from the Word, delivers words. The Bereans, from Paul’s words, go to the Word. The Word cycles from God, through the preacher, to the people, back to the Word, and this, verse 12 tells us, produced belief in the God of the Word. An important thing to note is that this happened daily – suggesting a regular interaction between preaching, personal study, and the Word.
The Bereans eagerly prepared by paralleling their own Bible reading and study with Paul’s preaching. So a good preparation for the public preaching of the Word is the private consumption of the Word. It will be the seasoning that brings out the flavor – salt on your French fries, if you will.
In the first part of the series, Kennedy makes it clear where the authority to interpret resides:
The New Testament often uses the word translated overseer or bishop. This word was primarily was used in the culture to refer to a governor who was sent by a conquering king to govern a city/state on behalf of the king. The overseer, the governor was to exercise oversight under the law the king had given. He was serving, not on his own behalf, but in the place of and for the good of the king. This is the term used for Elders. We are to govern the church on behalf of our King Jesus using the Scriptures as that which expresses His will and frames His wisdom. We are to govern and guide according to the Word of God.
But by the same token, these elders, and many others like them believe that all Scripture must interpreted in a way to yield a Christocentric (grace) meaning. Again, as noted in False Reformation (p. 100):
At this time, resist the temptation to utilize subsequent passages to validate the meaning or to move out from the immediate context. Remembering that all exegesis must finally be a Christocentric exegesis.
Look for Christ even if He isn’t there directly. It is better to see Christ in a text even if He isn’t, than to miss Him where He is.
Kennedy illustrates this in the same message via the following illustration.
Taken together, it is clearly a mystical approach that sees every verse in the Bible as redemptive, and a task that elders are only qualified to execute. This is spiritual cast that dates back to the beginning of time and always leads to tyranny. The point here is to clarify the divine rights of philosopher kings.
Now let’s address the ill behavior of Jean Larroux, and why it’s not relevant. First, the behavior. Jean Larroux’s outrageous behavior in the name of Christ is well documented. Larroux is the subject of chapter 8 in Cathleen Falsani’s “Sin Boldly.” Right, that’s the title of the book. It’s a treatise on, let’s sin more so grace may abound. According to Falsani, Larroux told her (in a conversation endowed with cursing and cigarette smoking) that the depths of grace can only be understood via the depths of our sinfulness. This is no less than the doctrine of the knowledge of good and evil that adorns the vast majority of tyrannical spiritual caste systems—especially Calvinism. This is the same Christocentric interpretation that the Clearcreek elders constantly refer to. All Scripture must be interpreted via God’s holiness as set against our wickedness. Obviously, if wisdom is the goal, and obedience puts us in a good light as opposed to endeavoring to understand our evil more and more; well, you do the math.
But there is something interesting about the writings of those, like Larroux, that think it better yet to actually practice evil as well to better understand grace; the disturbance of the conscience is clearly seen. However, it is usually seen as a vice to be overcome and related to an inept understanding of grace. On a blog belonging to a pastorate that preceded Southwood, Larroux writes the following:
I am becoming keenly aware of how little I actually believe the Gospel that I have been called to preach. I find it ‘easy’ to preach the truth, yet believing it is harder and harder.
Nevertheless, Larroux is a member of a prestigious club of Presbyterian philosopher kings—he is untouchable, and his sin is irrelevant to the Presbytery, and frankly, to most of the Presbyterian producers. I seriously doubt that many are unaware of the things revealed in the email I received, though heinous.
I receive many emails from hurting people who see this in the church and don’t know what to make of it. When you love the truth, it’s hard to get your mind around it. The email revelation will only build hope that someone will care with the enviable disappointment to follow, and deeper wounding.
Come out from among them. Where will you go? Go anywhere but back there. But wherever you end-up, Christ our brother will be with you, and our Helper will counsel you with powerful words from the Scriptures as you go.
All you lovers of the truth—Christ loves you, and for what it’s worth, I love you.
Forever His, and forever a yokefellow to the lovers of truth.
paul
Blogality: Why, and How New Calvinists Stalk Detractors
This post is about an element of blogosphere reality, or “blogality”; ie, being stalked by New Calvinists.
First, why do New Calvinists stalk people? Well, they have to because what they teach is out of the mainstream which means their teachings have to be covertly assimilated into the minds of their victims. While they are feeding the saints the elephant a bite at a time, anybody who knows about the whole elephant, and might pull it out of the barn for everyone to see is a serious threat. The saints mustn’t receive the truth “before they are ready for it.”
Furthermore, a parishioner of any given church can start Googling phrases and obtain all kinds of information that Reformed elders would prefer they didn’t know. The blogosphere is the engine of the information age, and information empowers people. And Reformed elders are not in the empowerment business—they are in the control business. That’s just bogality. And if the New Calvinist movement dies a social death like all other resurgent movements before it—the internet will be a primary reason.
Information and education is the foe that New Calvinists fear most. This is because truth doesn’t need to fear the facts. Hence, New Calvinists need to neutralize truth bearers for survival purposes, and the primary tool is stalking. Stalkers always want something. New Calvinists want you to shut up, and will stalk you till you do so. The following are their stalking techniques:
1. Fear of Authority and God. New Calvinists will first appeal to your fear of authority and God. Leaders are supposedly anointed by God and speak for Him directly. To contend against them is to contend against God.
2. Identity. They will attempt to educate you as far as “your place” in the spiritual food chain. And trust me, it will be low.
3. Loving Bombing. They will approach you out of concern and “love” for your own good. This will subtly be compared to them trying to help a crippled animal out of compassion that doesn’t know that the human is attempting to help them. This love bombing will be accompanied with prayer that “God will open your eyes of understanding.” This also feeds number four.
4. Dogma. They will not debate scriptural truth with you. This is part of a motif that they want to constantly present that their rightness is absolutely certain. To discuss theology with you would give credence to the idea that you are on the same spiritual plane of understanding. This also feeds the authority angle. Their position is absolutely right and nonnegotiable. This feeds an aurora of absolute self-confidence that New Calvinists continually and deliberately exude. This also contributes to, and feeds number five.
5. Undermining of self-confidence. This is why I have decided to no longer communicate with New Calvinists for any reason. Job one is to undermine your self-confidence (in what you know and who you are). Their stalking will always be focused on this, and there is no other agenda. They will attempt time and time again, relentlessly, to breakdown your self-confidence. This is the crux of their stalking.
6. Heart Experts. They understand the complex workings of the heart. Fact (supposedly): they “see certain things in you” that equal specific “idols of the heart.” They are the experts—you must succumb to their superior knowledge in regard to the heart of mankind.
All New Calvinist communications will flow from these six. Conversation with them is not fruitful because they will continue to come at you with these six approaches—continually recycling the approaches in various orders and in different forms. They will do this till they break you down and gain your submission.
Of course, anybody who has a cursory knowledge of cults will recognize the techniques as being the same.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
5 comments