The Rise and Fall of Mars Hill

[fairfarmhand]

This came up in another thread. I'd love to have some discussion on this podcast and the issues that it brings to the fore.

First of all, maybe I was living under a rock, but I'd never heard of Mark Driscoll. Anyone else? 🙂

Second, I'm having trouble articulating my reservations about the Mega Church Model. It seems that a large portion of Christianity is intended to be relational. And the Mega Church seems to not foster that relational concept. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding how it works? We go to a church of about 250 people. However, the real connection is fostered in Sunday School and smaller volunteer projects. Maybe Mega Churches work similarly? It just seems like a very clunky way of ministering to people. 

Third, I hate the emphasis on church life revolving around one Man or Woman. While yes, leadership is important, shouldn't the mission of a church be greater than that? Of course, that's what it seems the Mars Hill thing boiled down to. It became about a person and then crumbled into dust.

Fourth, when a leader does not consistently reflect the fruits of the Spirit, they are not worthy of leadership in a church. 

Fifth, when did we get the idea that Numbers=Success in Christianity? Sheer numbers doesn't equal "fruit" Why were supposedly wise, "Biblically literate" people oblivious to this fact? Doesn't the story of David numbering the people of Israel become a cautionary tale to those blinded by numbers? How should a church measure "success"?

 

Anything else anyone want to talk about? 

Does this pattern from Mars Hill follow what you are seeing in your community or congregation?

[Sneezyone]

I lived in Seattle, maybe 15 minutes drive—10 the way the crow flies—from their Ballard campus around their peak/implosion. I remember being so annoyed b/c parking at Trader Joe’s was always clogged. The local media covered a lot of the victim’s stories but that’s as interested as I ever got. It’s been an interesting listen. I didn’t understand the appeal and still don’t.
 

My dad attends a similar (VERY) style of church in SoCal. There are satellites in three countries and multiple cities. They make connections in small groups through volunteer-led Bible study classes and other ministries—food deliveries, music, Sunday school, etc. I’ve attended there with my dad in the past without issue. It wasn’t my worship style but was mainline and conventional. This time—no.
 

I wrote about my experience on the progressive Christianity page. Suffice it to say that the ‘pastor’ preached a message that was ostensibly about how COVID is being used to silence the church by preventing gatherings and speech (masking). The message was liberally sprinkled with choice Bible passages but was fundamentally related to a drop in church in attendance and volunteerism (during the PANDEMIC!). I assume they’re feeling a cash crunch. The screed ended with a call to scan a QR code and get back to work…for free. It was so uncomfortable and off-putting that we were all silent in the car on the way home. It was awful. I don’t know where that kind of twisted theology comes from but I was horrified and so were my kids. 
 

What astounds me about listening to the podcast is how many people in key positions, particularly the media ministry, knew the whole thing was problematic.

ETA: this topic has interested me since my early years in the church. My family experienced a church implosion after pastoral sexual abuse was discovered ( my family was VERY involved in the church at the time) and I also recall my HS best friend telling me about her father, a former elder, who was cut out of Fred Price’s church after he raised issues about financial improprieties and ministerial priorities. 

Edited October 7, 2021 by Sneezyone

[mom2scouts]

7 minutes ago, fairfarmhand said:

This came up in another thread. I'd love to have some discussion on this podcast and the issues that it brings to the fore.

First of all, maybe I was living under a rock, but I'd never heard of Mark Driscoll. Anyone else? 🙂

Second, I'm having trouble articulating my reservations about the Mega Church Model. It seems that a large portion of Christianity is intended to be relational. And the Mega Church seems to not foster that relational concept. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding how it works? We go to a church of about 250 people. However, the real connection is fostered in Sunday School and smaller volunteer projects. Maybe Mega Churches work similarly? It just seems like a very clunky way of ministering to people. 

Third, I hate the emphasis on church life revolving around one Man or Woman. While yes, leadership is important, shouldn't the mission of a church be greater than that? Of course, that's what it seems the Mars Hill thing boiled down to. It became about a person and then crumbled into dust.

Fourth, when a leader does not consistently reflect the fruits of the Spirit, they are not worthy of leadership in a church. 

Fifth, when did we get the idea that Numbers=Success in Christianity? Sheer numbers doesn't equal "fruit" Why were supposedly wise, "Biblically literate" people oblivious to this fact? Doesn't the story of David numbering the people of Israel become a cautionary tale to those blinded by numbers? How should a church measure "success"?

 

Anything else anyone want to talk about? 

Does this pattern from Mars Hill follow what you are seeing in your community or congregation?

I haven't listened to the Mars Hill podcast yet and I'm not totally familiar with the events, although I might try to listen and come back to this discussion later. I would like to address the mega church idea. I go to a large non-denom church (maybe 800 on a Sunday). It's definitely not a mega church, but it was started by a mega church. The mega church in our area looks at surrounding communities and then plants new churches by sending one of their pastors and about 50 families to start the new church. The mega church financially supports the new church for about a year or two until it can stand on its own as an independent church. This has been extremely successful. I know of at least 9 large churches started by the mega church. These churches are all very deliberate about relationships and fostering connections in small groups. There are small groups of 10-15 people who meet together every week or two to discuss the sermon, pray for each other, do Bible study, volunteer together, or do fun stuff. There are women's groups and men's groups, middle school groups, teen groups divided by grade, groups that run or hike together, college age groups, mission teams, groups of artists, people who work together on various volunteer and outreach projects, mom groups, addiction recovery groups, sports teams, marriage groups, prayer groups. Anyone who joins one or more groups has a regular connection to smaller groups of people within the church.

I agree with you on leadership. When it becomes all about the personality of the leader, things can go very wrong very easily. If the church is built around a person, it's hard to fire the person who shouldn't be in leadership any longer.

I have mixed feelings about numbers. If you don't get people hearing the Word that's a problem, but I do think it needs to be balanced with changed lives. Our pastors preach chapter by chapter through a book of the Bible for weeks or months. OTOH, we left our mainline denomination years ago because they did good things in the community, but barely ever even opened the Bible. Now we're seeing that and other churches like it barely hanging on with aging and dwindling congregations that can barely support themselves. I think there are still people who want to study the Bible and they're showing up at the churches that give them that while the churches that don't are dying.

[Sneezyone]

33 minutes ago, mom2scouts said:

I haven't listened to the Mars Hill podcast yet and I'm not totally familiar with the events, although I might try to listen and come back to this discussion later. I would like to address the mega church idea. I go to a large non-denom church (maybe 800 on a Sunday). It's definitely not a mega church, but it was started by a mega church. The mega church in our area looks at surrounding communities and then plants new churches by sending one of their pastors and about 50 families to start the new church. The mega church financially supports the new church for about a year or two until it can stand on its own as an independent church. This has been extremely successful. I know of at least 9 large churches started by the mega church. These churches are all very deliberate about relationships and fostering connections in small groups. There are small groups of 10-15 people who meet together every week or two to discuss the sermon, pray for each other, do Bible study, volunteer together, or do fun stuff. There are women's groups and men's groups, middle school groups, teen groups divided by grade, groups that run or hike together, college age groups, mission teams, groups of artists, people who work together on various volunteer and outreach projects, mom groups, addiction recovery groups, sports teams, marriage groups, prayer groups. Anyone who joins one or more groups has a regular connection to smaller groups of people within the church.

I agree with you on leadership. When it becomes all about the personality of the leader, things can go very wrong very easily. If the church is built around a person, it's hard to fire the person who shouldn't be in leadership any longer.

I have mixed feelings about numbers. If you don't get people hearing the Word that's a problem, but I do think it needs to be balanced with changed lives. Our pastors preach chapter by chapter through a book of the Bible for weeks or months. OTOH, we left our mainline denomination years ago because they did good things in the community, but barely ever even opened the Bible. Now we're seeing that and other churches like it barely hanging on with aging and dwindling congregations that can barely support themselves. I think there are still people who want to study the Bible and they're showing up at the churches that give them that while the churches that don't are dying.

A lot of people’s lives were changed by Mars Hill, World Changers, even the 700 Club. Does that excuse or balance out the twisted theology, financial improprieties or congregant abuse? The scriptures can be used to justify pretty much anything someone wants to claim as righteous—from murder, to slavery, to child marriage/physical abuse. It’s not enough to preach from scripture.

Edited October 7, 2021 by Sneezyone

[HS Mom in NC]

Anyone else struck by all the talk by Driscoll from the pulpit and in other contexts about men like him and his church members being tough, manly, warriors, but when it came time for those supposedly manly men (elders) under Driscoll's teaching to stand up and deal with a real threat, which was Driscoll himself, they had concerns for years and years and years but couldn't bring themselves to stand up to him? And when those first elders were pushed out those other manly men (the elders that remained) handed Driscoll the checks on his power they all had?!? Up is down and wrong is right and the inmates are running the asylum.

I would've asked the leadership being interviewed to compare and contrast what they thought and said about members who left early on when the problems started and what they think and say about those members now.  Also, did any of those members come to the elders about concerns? What did those elders think and say at the time?  I've personally witnessed others and expressed myself serious concerns about certain leadership, had it minimized by others in leadership, left, and then it all fell apart. Do they learn their lesson on reflection?

It was quite the metaphor for the guy who had the double eye infection.  He was blind to Driscoll's lack of integrity, and it took another pastor with integrity to taking him somewhere he could be cured and to see clearly.  The blind (elders who stayed on and kept quiet) were leading the blind (members who stayed even though Drisoll's character was clearly on display.)

And the ridiculous argument that, "Well, we didn't speak up because some people's lives were changing for the better." Um, what? So you won't correct your child abusing their siblings because the child is doing well academically and has great friendships?  Are you going to overlook adultery by your spouse because they're a great business owner and have an amazing relationship with their parents? No, Crazy.  That's not how that works. We're not doing that.

I'm very serious when I say none of those elders should have another leadership position for a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time. I mean on the order of at least a couple of decades,  if ever again.

[klmama]

1 hour ago, fairfarmhand said:

Does this pattern from Mars Hill follow what you are seeing in your community or congregation?

No, not at all.  Our pastors are super humble and answer to each other and the congregation.  The pastors plan each sermon series together and take turns preaching, so church doesn't become a personality cult.  There's no hint of the "prosperity gospel" or of any kind of political agenda - instead it's about loving God, knowing His Word, and loving others.  Church finances are explained regularly by the congregational stewardship board, so everyone knows where the money is going and why.  Even though it's technically a mega-church (over 1000 people, multiple sites), it still has a small church feel because people connect through small groups and volunteering.  About 25 years ago some people left over the decision to include praise songs instead of just traditional hymns, but there's never been a scandal involving the pastors.  Decent guys, all of them. 

[mom2scouts]

43 minutes ago, Homeschool Mom in AZ said:

Anyone else struck by all the talk by Driscoll from the pulpit and in other contexts about men like him and his church members being tough, manly, warriors, but when it came time for those supposedly manly men (elders) under Driscoll's teaching to stand up and deal with a real threat, which was Driscoll himself, they had concerns for years and years and years but couldn't bring themselves to stand up to him? And when those first elders were pushed out those other manly men (the elders that remained) handed Driscoll the checks on his power they all had?!? Up is down and wrong is right and the inmates are running the asylum.

I would've asked the leadership being interviewed to compare and contrast what they thought and said about members who left early on when the problems started and what they think and say about those members now.  Also, did any of those members come to the elders about concerns? What did those elders think and say at the time?  I've personally witnessed others and expressed myself serious concerns about certain leadership, had it minimized by others in leadership, left, and then it all fell apart. Do they learn their lesson on reflection?

It was quite the metaphor for the guy who had the double eye infection.  He was blind to Driscoll's lack of integrity, and it took another pastor with integrity to taking him somewhere he could be cured and to see clearly.  The blind (elders who stayed on and kept quiet) were leading the blind (members who stayed even though Drisoll's character was clearly on display.)

And the ridiculous argument that, "Well, we didn't speak up because some people's lives were changing for the better." Um, what? So you won't correct your child abusing their siblings because the child is doing well academically and has great friendships?  Are you going to overlook adultery by your spouse because they're a great business owner and have an amazing relationship with their parents? No, Crazy.  That's not how that works. We're not doing that.

I'm very serious when I say none of those elders should have another leadership position for a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time. I mean on the order of at least a couple of decades,  if ever again.

I just started listening because I'm not too familiar with Driscoll or Mars Hill. Would bringing concerns to the elders have been useful or were the elders too worried about losing their positions to do anything about concerns? Did people who tried to speak up just give up and leave or were they the ones "thrown under the bus" and fired for daring to go against Driscoll? If lives were being changed and just as many other lives were being ruined doesn't that equal a net of zero effectiveness?

[Sneezyone]

1 hour ago, Homeschool Mom in AZ said:

Anyone else struck by all the talk by Driscoll from the pulpit and in other contexts about men like him and his church members being tough, manly, warriors, but when it came time for those supposedly manly men (elders) under Driscoll's teaching to stand up and deal with a real threat, which was Driscoll himself, they had concerns for years and years and years but couldn't bring themselves to stand up to him? And when those first elders were pushed out those other manly men (the elders that remained) handed Driscoll the checks on his power they all had?!? Up is down and wrong is right and the inmates are running the asylum.

I would've asked the leadership being interviewed to compare and contrast what they thought and said about members who left early on when the problems started and what they think and say about those members now.  Also, did any of those members come to the elders about concerns? What did those elders think and say at the time?  I've personally witnessed others and expressed myself serious concerns about certain leadership, had it minimized by others in leadership, left, and then it all fell apart. Do they learn their lesson on reflection?

It was quite the metaphor for the guy who had the double eye infection.  He was blind to Driscoll's lack of integrity, and it took another pastor with integrity to taking him somewhere he could be cured and to see clearly.  The blind (elders who stayed on and kept quiet) were leading the blind (members who stayed even though Drisoll's character was clearly on display.)

And the ridiculous argument that, "Well, we didn't speak up because some people's lives were changing for the better." Um, what? So you won't correct your child abusing their siblings because the child is doing well academically and has great friendships?  Are you going to overlook adultery by your spouse because they're a great business owner and have an amazing relationship with their parents? No, Crazy.  That's not how that works. We're not doing that.

I'm very serious when I say none of those elders should have another leadership position for a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time. I mean on the order of at least a couple of decades,  if ever again.

Mostly, I was speechless about his teachings on sexuality. I can roll my eyes at the manliness bits and don’t subscribe to the male as ‘knower of all things’ and ‘maintainer of all that is good’ tripe but the blatant condoning of, essentially, marital rape was just…wow.

[Sneezyone]

18 minutes ago, mom2scouts said:

I just started listening because I'm not too familiar with Driscoll or Mars Hill. Would bringing concerns to the elders have been useful or were the elders too worried about losing their positions to do anything about concerns? Did people who tried to speak up just give up and leave or were they the ones "thrown under the bus" and fired for daring to go against Driscoll? If lives were being changed and just as many other lives were being ruined doesn't that equal a net of zero effectiveness?

The damage done to Christian witness goes well beyond the individuals profiled in the story.

[DawnM]

I have been listening to a podcast that mentions him and his role in contributing to the current conditions of evangelicalism.   The podcast is excellent (and there is also a book by the same title).  It is called Jesus and John Wayne.   I highly recommend it.

It is time for some real change in the church and while I am a semi-deconstructionist at this time, I am not going to throw out the baby with the bathwater.   The church can do better.   It has to.   I am still struggling to find my place in the church, but the mega church model is all about numbers and dollars.    We have a mega church here that makes me sick.   You have probably heard of it if you are in the evangelical world.   It is called Elevation, with Steven Furtick.   I could go on and on about the issues there.......

Anyway, my main point in posting was to recommend the Jesus and John Wayne book and podcast.

Edited October 7, 2021 by DawnM

[Katy]

I haven’t listened to the podcast yet, but I have watched this series (strong language warning!!!), and while it is personal rather than polished, it expresses similar themes around a cult of personality and big money.  

 

[ktgrok]

10 hours ago, fairfarmhand said:

 

Fifth, when did we get the idea that Numbers=Success in Christianity? Sheer numbers doesn't equal "fruit" Why were supposedly wise, "Biblically literate" people oblivious to this fact? Doesn't the story of David numbering the people of Israel become a cautionary tale to those blinded by numbers? How should a church measure "success"?

 

 

2 hours ago, DawnM said:

I am still struggling to find my place in the church, but the mega church model is all about numbers and dollars.    We have a mega church here that makes me sick.   You have probably heard of it if you are in the evangelical world.   It is called Elevation, with Steven Furtick.   I could go on and on about the issues there.......

 

Yup. The best explanation/description I've heard for this is that at some point large churches started being very influenced by a corporate model of success. The pastors were reading books written by corporate leaders on how to be a leader. The conferences and continuing education had secular leaders coming in to teach about leadership. Which is a problem, because church leadership is NOT the same thing as leading a company. A church leader is a shepherd who must protect and lead his flock, not a financial person trying to keep stock holders happy. It's just the wrong model, but it's what happened. This also meant a lot of people who would be good pastors but bad CEOs left because they felt they had "failed" by not meeing this arbitrary, worldy idea of success. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

It was local to me. We went to one of their satellites one time out of sheer curiosity. I vaguely remember the sermon on Jonah. It was ok but lacked any meat. My kids complained that the kids program was so watered down that my elementary school kids knew more than the teachers. And when I went to pick the kids but that was exactly what the teachers said to me. (This isn’t a brag about my kids. They had had probably the same amount of teaching and exposure that most Christian homeschoolers). So my one time experience at the satellite (which was overseen by Driscoll but not directly pastored by him) was not of any weird teaching but of “lite teaching “. 
 

My one other memory was that the music was rock concert loud. 

[Faith-manor]

8 hours ago, mom2scouts said:

I just started listening because I'm not too familiar with Driscoll or Mars Hill. Would bringing concerns to the elders have been useful or were the elders too worried about losing their positions to do anything about concerns? Did people who tried to speak up just give up and leave or were they the ones "thrown under the bus" and fired for daring to go against Driscoll? If lives were being changed and just as many other lives were being ruined doesn't that equal a net of zero effectiveness?

In my experience, I have never in any size church found going to elders to be helpful. They seem to be bizarrely under trained, and like most middle and high schools, picked by popularity not qualifications. So the are at best, no help but maybe not dangerous, and at worst, total yes men and as corrupt as the pastor at the helm. We have watched that mess play at out at more than one church. One survived after a fashion with a small group of people starting over. The other closed its doors after the liability insurance paid out a startlingly large amount of money because the pastor - a legal reporter - covered up for a father (elder of the church) who was molesting his niece. And we are talking about multiple reports and accusations from the niece to teachers at the Christian school the church operated, and all that she ever got from "leadership" was "repent of your lies" and an attempt to exorcise the "demon" out of her. The elder did eventually go to prison for a paltry 3 years on a plea deal. They gave the drum bag the deal so he'd fess up and identify other victims of which there were four. Side note: this is when there should be a public castration with a dull knife and a rock so the rest of pedos know we are coming for them. But nope. 3 years. I know people caught with a dime bag of weed who got more than 3 years before it was legalized here!

At any rate, I think elders tend to not be particularly useful, and that goes for issues that are not criminal/legal ones. I have seen this over and over. My own father was an elder at his church, and frankly, he had no business being one. His qualifications were "old, white male, misogynist bible thumper". No training to any kind was provided. Tons of hair raising things were swept under the rug because either the elders hero worshipped the pastor, or were more worried about the church's reputation than actual people.

[ktgrok]

10 hours ago, mom2scouts said:

OTOH, we left our mainline denomination years ago because they did good things in the community, but barely ever even opened the Bible. 

Ok, this is surprising to me. What mainline denomination doesn't read from the Bible during the service?

[chiguirre]

3 hours ago, DawnM said:

 

Anyway, my main point in posting was to recommend the Jesus and John Wayne book and podcast.

I'll second the recommendation. I gained a lot of insight into local culture from that book. I wish it had come out 15 years ago. It would have made understanding my mega church loving local community much easier.

[gardenmom5]

11 hours ago, fairfarmhand said:

This came up in another thread. I'd love to have some discussion on this podcast and the issues that it brings to the fore.

First of all, maybe I was living under a rock, but I'd never heard of Mark Driscoll. Anyone else? 🙂

Second, I'm having trouble articulating my reservations about the Mega Church Model. It seems that a large portion of Christianity is intended to be relational. And the Mega Church seems to not foster that relational concept. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding how it works? We go to a church of about 250 people. However, the real connection is fostered in Sunday School and smaller volunteer projects. Maybe Mega Churches work similarly? It just seems like a very clunky way of ministering to people. 

Third, I hate the emphasis on church life revolving around one Man or Woman. While yes, leadership is important, shouldn't the mission of a church be greater than that? Of course, that's what it seems the Mars Hill thing boiled down to. It became about a person and then crumbled into dust.

Fourth, when a leader does not consistently reflect the fruits of the Spirit, they are not worthy of leadership in a church. 

Fifth, when did we get the idea that Numbers=Success in Christianity? Sheer numbers doesn't equal "fruit" Why were supposedly wise, "Biblically literate" people oblivious to this fact? Doesn't the story of David numbering the people of Israel become a cautionary tale to those blinded by numbers? How should a church measure "success"?

 

Anything else anyone want to talk about? 

Does this pattern from Mars Hill follow what you are seeing in your community or congregation?

Marc Driscoll is originally from the greater area.  I knew who he was - but didn't otherwise pay any attention to him.  We had a Mars Hill Church in town for awhile.  From the things on the local news - he seemed a "wolf in sheep's clothing".   That he owned a house in Woodway (tiny and exclusive suburb on Puget Sound.). didn't speak well to his ethics considering he got his income from "the church'.  (he founded another one after he was forced out.)

To me,  I  think the mega-church model is far too often where you have a charismatic leader and people are attached to them, not the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or even the scriptures.

[gardenmom5]

41 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

My one other memory was that the music was rock concert loud. 

My brother used to play hard rock as loud as the stereo could handle.  Considering it was my dad's stereo, and my brother took it to his room after my father's death - it had some ability to crank it out.  I now go out of my way to avoid loud rock music.

One of the things I noticed - you can't even think when it is super loud.    For me - and even worse, it drives the spirit away.  Dh was invited to an "original" Christmas program by one of his clients at a different (it's been there as long as I can remember) mega church in town.  They had rock music for it too.  It just felt completely empty, and void of any good feelings.  I despised it - and finally just walked out and sat in the car.  In December in the Seattle area (when it is cold and wet.).  I could have gone to a quality live performance of Handel's Messiah (which I love) that night - so I wasn't happy at all.  

[Faith-manor]

2 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

My brother used to play hard rock as loud as the stereo could handle.  Considering it was my dad's stereo, and my brother took it to his room after my father's death - it had some ability to crank it out.  I now go out of my way to avoid loud rock music.

One of the things I noticed - you can't even think when it is super loud.    For me - and even worse, it drives the spirit away.  Dh was invited to an "original" Christmas program by one of his clients at a different (it's been there as long as I can remember) mega church in town.  They had rock music for it too.  It just felt completely empty, and void of any good feelings.  I despised it - and finally just walked out and sat in the car.  In December in the Seattle area (when it is cold and wet.).  I could have gone to a quality live performance of Handel's Messiah (which I love) that night - so I wasn't happy at all.  

Many worship bands are loud enough to exceed the decibel level is required to damage hearing. My brother is a sound tech and has been a consultant for churches. He will often show up on the Sunday before his meeting/consultation with a decibel meter. Nearly always, the worship team and sound folks refuse to turn the volume down. They insist on providing a rock concert, and all of those ding dongs in the pews are just Sunday after Sunday having their hearing damaged. So stupid. Not sure how that is a Jesusy thing, by I suspect most of the culture around worship bands and mega church has very, very little to do with god and a lot more with popularity. I feel like a lot of these people got stuck in high school mentality and never grew up.

[Katy]

One of the elders in our last church was in our small group. He wasn't even Christian.  He was openly alcoholic, wasn't sure if he believed in an afterlife, but if it exists he was certain Jesus had nothing to do with it. He was very open about that, and knew almost nothing about the Bible.  What he did was attend regularly (it was important to his wife), he was high in management in an internationally known corporation, he opened his mansion regularly to host events for people in church, and didn't object when his wife wrote large checks regularly. She was actually Christian and actually knows scripture.  Don't ask me why SHE wasn't asked to be an elder.  She was qualified IMO.

[fairfarmhand]

11 minutes ago, Katy said:

One of the elders in our last church was in our small group. He wasn't even Christian.  He was openly alcoholic, wasn't sure if he believed in an afterlife, but if it exists he was certain Jesus had nothing to do with it. He was very open about that, and knew almost nothing about the Bible.  What he did was attend regularly (it was important to his wife), he was high in management in an internationally known corporation, he opened his mansion regularly to host events for people in church, and didn't object when his wife wrote large checks regularly. She was actually Christian and actually knows scripture.  Don't ask me why SHE wasn't asked to be an elder.  She was qualified IMO.

wow. 🙄

[Katy]

3 minutes ago, fairfarmhand said:

wow. 🙄

Yeah.  Shortly thereafter the pastor started saying things in sermons that made me doubt if he had any faith at all.  Shortly after that DH got a job transfer so we had a convenient excuse, but it would have been difficult to figure out how to leave that church.  We had friends and DH's coworkers there.

I think we weren't the only people unhappy with the pastor though, because he got a job transfer to another state and retired very shortly thereafter.

[ktgrok]

44 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

Many worship bands are loud enough to exceed the decibel level is required to damage hearing. My brother is a sound tech and has been a consultant for churches. He will often show up on the Sunday before his meeting/consultation with a decibel meter. Nearly always, the worship team and sound folks refuse to turn the volume down. They insist on providing a rock concert, and all of those ding dongs in the pews are just Sunday after Sunday having their hearing damaged. So stupid. Not sure how that is a Jesusy thing, by I suspect most of the culture around worship bands and mega church has very, very little to do with god and a lot more with popularity. I feel like a lot of these people got stuck in high school mentality and never grew up.

Again not protecting the flock. 

[Faith-manor]

38 minutes ago, Katy said:

One of the elders in our last church was in our small group. He wasn't even Christian.  He was openly alcoholic, wasn't sure if he believed in an afterlife, but if it exists he was certain Jesus had nothing to do with it. He was very open about that, and knew almost nothing about the Bible.  What he did was attend regularly (it was important to his wife), he was high in management in an internationally known corporation, he opened his mansion regularly to host events for people in church, and didn't object when his wife wrote large checks regularly. She was actually Christian and actually knows scripture.  Don't ask me why SHE wasn't asked to be an elder.  She was qualified IMO.

I nave seen this kind of thing before. Money talks in many churches, so big donors get elevated to positions they are not qualified for but everyone looks the other way in order to keep the cash going.

[NorthwestMom]

39 minutes ago, Katy said:

 She was actually Christian and actually knows scripture.  Don't ask me why SHE wasn't asked to be an elder.  She was qualified IMO.

The misogyny that Mark Driscoll espoused that was presented in this podcast was shocking to me. There was an episode where he urged wives to give b***jobs to keep their husbands happy and also as a way to encourage the men to go to church, and he (poorly) cited scripture he claimed to support it. 😵 I am not a Christian but this was deeply, deeply offensive to me. The role of women that he espoused was gross and sick.

[kbutton]

I am not listening to the podcast because I followed the story earlier on, and that was enough. I am glad someone is doing a post-mortem on the whole situation.

Other places for coverage: 

http://thewartburgwatch.com/

https://www.wthrockmorton.com/  (He's talking about the new church also.)

https://julieroys.com/

13 hours ago, fairfarmhand said:

Does this pattern from Mars Hill follow what you are seeing in your community or congregation?

Yes and no.

The SBC has it's own version of authoritarianism that they seem to be pumping out of their Louisville seminary. There are trends that bother me that I see here and there that are disturbing. One is church covenants. There are interesting articles about covenants on The Wartburg Watch blog. 

Christian Nationalism seems like a bigger issue here than I knew it was and is more of a problem than the Driscoll mindset (which again, is kin to the SBC stuff). It's more covert than a lot of the Christian Nationalism I grew up seeing around me (I grew up in the cradleland of one arm of the IFB movement), but it's really come out of the woodwork during the pandemic. I've noted its effects for several years, but I didn't know that it was behind those things--I thought Christian Nationalism was anachronistic, honestly. I thought it was something people flirted with in previous decades and then discarded. 

[Doodlebug]

I've listened to the podcast in its entirety and find it troubling that A) Marc Driscoll could get it so very wrong, and B) that many are quick to label him a narcissist and move on without recognizing he didn't do this alone -- the people ATE.IT.UP.  I expect the former to occur from time to time.  But the latter was a failure on so many levels -- of friends, clergy, etc.  

I did find it encouraging to hear the stories of those who addressed Marc and were kicked to the curb, or left.  They did the right thing and it cost them dearly.  

 

Edited October 7, 2021 by Doodlebug

[ktgrok]

14 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

I've been hearing for years how the "liberal" mainline churches are all dying. But that's actually not true. We sometimes attend an Episcopal church. They have young families. They are full on Sunday. And they even open the Bible. 

I think it's kind of unfair to say that a mainline church "barely even opened the Bible." I think we all know that isn't true. 

I also know many people, including myself, who have left conservative churches since 2016. 

The most recent Pew poll (I think that is what it was) showed Mainline denominations growing for the first time in a while. 

And yeah, I've been to Presbyterian, Episcopal, Methodist, UCC, etc churches and never been to a service where at least two passages fro the Bible were not read. 

[WildflowerMom]

5 hours ago, ktgrok said:

Ok, this is surprising to me. What mainline denomination doesn't read from the Bible during the service?

Ours had a reading or two then it was mostly talk about saints and existentialism.   Our pastor focused on books he’d read, not The Book. 
An episcopal church. 

[Sneezyone]

6 hours ago, ktgrok said:

 

Yup. The best explanation/description I've heard for this is that at some point large churches started being very influenced by a corporate model of success. The pastors were reading books written by corporate leaders on how to be a leader. The conferences and continuing education had secular leaders coming in to teach about leadership. Which is a problem, because church leadership is NOT the same thing as leading a company. A church leader is a shepherd who must protect and lead his flock, not a financial person trying to keep stock holders happy. It's just the wrong model, but it's what happened. This also meant a lot of people who would be good pastors but bad CEOs left because they felt they had "failed" by not meeing this arbitrary, worldy idea of success. 

The podcast talks a lot about the the influence of prior iterations of 'mega' churches. I'm not sure what to make of it. I'm not philosophically opposed to large churches with multiple campuses, etc. anymore than large universities with multiple campuses. It's what happens within the leadership of those organizations, the biblical teaching, that things can go haywire. It may well be that size, and the pressure to maintain/pay for the physical plants, necessarily corrupts the biblical message but I don't know that for sure. I've only seen my dad's church example (and it wasn't pretty) and now listening to this podcast. It's not a world I've ever been comfortable with. 

Edited October 7, 2021 by Sneezyone

[gardenmom5]

4 hours ago, NorthwestMom said:

The misogyny that Mark Driscoll espoused that was presented in this podcast was shocking to me. There was an episode where he urged wives to give b***jobs to keep their husbands happy and also as a way to encourage the men to go to church, and he (poorly) cited scripture he claimed to support it. 😵 I am not a Christian but this was deeply, deeply offensive to me. The role of women that he espoused was gross and sick.

I guess he wasn't happy at home, and was complaining in public.  🙄  It seems like most men like this are into some of the more gross p*rn.  Which certainly doesn't sit well with his claims of being  a shepherd of a christian flock . . . .

3 hours ago, Doodlebug said:

I've listened to the podcast in its entirety and find it troubling that A) Marc Driscoll could get it so very wrong, and B) that many are quick to label him a narcissist and move on without recognizing he didn't do this alone -- the people ATE.IT.UP.  I expect the former to occur from time to time.  But the latter was a failure on so many levels -- of friends, clergy, etc.  

I did find it encouraging to hear the stories of those who addressed Marc and were kicked to the curb, or left.  They did the right thing and it cost them dearly.  

 

This. Narcissists do not operate in a vacuum.  They require followers to tell them how wonderful they are, enablers to open doors for them, enforcers/flying monkeys to force people to toe-the-line, etc.

51 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:

Ours had a reading or two then it was mostly talk about saints and existentialism.   Our pastor focused on books he’d read, not The Book. 
An episcopal church. 

Is yours part of a larger group, or independent?  even then - it's one pastor out of many.

[Sneezyone]

5 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

Many worship bands are loud enough to exceed the decibel level is required to damage hearing. My brother is a sound tech and has been a consultant for churches. He will often show up on the Sunday before his meeting/consultation with a decibel meter. Nearly always, the worship team and sound folks refuse to turn the volume down. They insist on providing a rock concert, and all of those ding dongs in the pews are just Sunday after Sunday having their hearing damaged. So stupid. Not sure how that is a Jesusy thing, by I suspect most of the culture around worship bands and mega church has very, very little to do with god and a lot more with popularity. I feel like a lot of these people got stuck in high school mentality and never grew up.

This is soooooo not a part of my worship style preference that I can hardly stand it but, yeah, my dad's church is like this. Gimme a good old-fashioned gospel service with the red/green book of hymns any day.

Edited October 7, 2021 by Sneezyone

[ktgrok]

55 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:

Ours had a reading or two then it was mostly talk about saints and existentialism.   Our pastor focused on books he’d read, not The Book. 
An episcopal church. 

The Episcopal Rite II service (most common one) pretty much always has a reading from the Old Testament, a Psalm or portion of one read responsively, a reading from an Epistle or book of Acts, and then a reading from one of the Gospels. You can't do just one or two readings and still follow the Book of Common Prayer...this sounds like a church that went off the rails if indeed they were not using the BCP. 

[gardenmom5]

59 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Of course. 

This is an example of a kind of prejudice. It's exhausting because I've heard it a million times. Liberal Christians aren't Christians. They don't read the Bible. They don't believe in Jesus. They just "virtue signal." 

It's very insulting. 

ETA because on the other side whenever a Christian person does something terrible, it's #notallchristians. 

You can't have it both ways. 

I'm tired of it too  - and I'm conservative.   leave the politics at the door.  

We're not following politicians/political-parties.   - we're supposed to be followers of Jesus Christ - who transcends politics.   I'd rather put my focus on that, and actually doing my best to practice what He preached.  I think I can be a better influence for good that way too.  I hope.

Edited October 7, 2021 by gardenmom5

[ktgrok]

Just now, gardenmom5 said:

I'm tired of it too  - and I'm conservative.   leave the politics at the door.  

We're not following politicians/political-parties.   - we're supposed to be followers of Jesus Christ - who transcends politics.   I'd rather put my focus on that, and actually doing my best to practice what He preached.

Yup. 

In fact, at my new uber progressive church the pastor gave a bit of a talking to to the congregation about focusing on what unites us, not divides us, and being nice on social media. I guess before we joined they lost members of a more conservative bent after some nasty facebook stuff regarding politics. (members, not the church/pastor talking about politics)

[gardenmom5]

4 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Yup. 

In fact, at my new uber progressive church the pastor gave a bit of a talking to to the congregation about focusing on what unites us, not divides us, and being nice on social media. I guess before we joined they lost members of a more conservative bent after some nasty facebook stuff regarding politics. (members, not the church/pastor talking about politics)

 What a better world we would have if people would focus on this.

[WildflowerMom]

11 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

The Episcopal Rite II service (most common one) pretty much always has a reading from the Old Testament, a Psalm or portion of one read responsively, a reading from an Epistle or book of Acts, and then a reading from one of the Gospels. You can't do just one or two readings and still follow the Book of Common Prayer...this sounds like a church that went off the rails if indeed they were not using the BCP. 

We used the BCP, we had 2 readings at the beginning of the service, and our sermon was pretty much never based on the Bible.  I don't remember it ever being based on the Bible as an adult and that's why I left.  I was one of many who left.  I grew up in it (well, from 10yo to 22 or so).   My mother was a Eucharistic minister until about 3 years ago.  

[WildflowerMom]

15 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Yup. 

In fact, at my new uber progressive church the pastor gave a bit of a talking to to the congregation about focusing on what unites us, not divides us, and being nice on social media. I guess before we joined they lost members of a more conservative bent after some nasty facebook stuff regarding politics. (members, not the church/pastor talking about politics)

Our episcopal priest definitely talked politics.  It drove my mom away.   He really just needed to call it quits, probably and go into a nonprofit or something.   He was an awesome guy, but maybe not the person to be pastor of a church.   

Edited October 7, 2021 by WildflowerMom

[ktgrok]

35 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:

We used the BCP, we had 2 readings at the beginning of the service, and our sermon was pretty much never based on the Bible.  I don't remember it ever being based on the Bible as an adult and that's why I left.  I was one of many who left.  I grew up in it (well, from 10yo to 22 or so).   My mother was a Eucharistic minister until about 3 years ago.  

Then they were not following the order of the service - should have been Old Testament, Psalm, Epistle, New Testament. That's a decent chunk of bible. Now, a pastor who never actually tied their sermon into any of it would have me looking for another church. 

[ktgrok]

9 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

I think this sounds good but what does it actually mean? 

In practice, everyone putting their differences and finding the common ground doesn't lead to fundamental change. Putting aside politics because you don't want to offend anyone benefits the status quo. 

What is "political" anyway? Was MLK being "political" when he preached in churches that Jim Crow was evil? And let's remember that white Christians of the time believed that MLK was a radical. 

What lead to the successes of the Civil Rights movement? Was it looking for what united people or focusing on what was right and wrong? 

I've seen people call the COVID vaccine and masking "political." They are subjects that can't be discussed in certain settings because they are "too political" But it doesn't have to be that way. We can get along in a secular forum like this one but what's wrong with a church saying that it's immoral to not mask? 

I read something today about a woman who attended a church where they all refused to mask or get vaccinated. She has a child who had cancer. She stopped attending that church because the church refused to enforce masking. Those people were wrong. A church should be able to say that. Especially one that believes in eternal salvation. Those people are committed a serious sin. Why didn't their religious leaders caution them about that kind of a sin? 

My political choices are based on a number of things including morality. I know that's hard for some people to believe because they assume all "values voters" are conservative Republicans. 

I'm not going to sit down and break bread with someone who hates me because of who I am. That's what the church always asks of us. The minority is always supposed to be quiet and keep the peace. One of the issues in the SBC is that majority African Americans are breaking off because they aren't respected. They are supposed to provide diversity and make everyone feel good about how much unity there is but the minute they say something about racism, it's "too political." 

He wasn't saying to not disagree or speak of disagreements. But to speak those disagreements in a way that is truthful, but not hateful. And this church does say it is a moral obligation to mask, held a vaccine clinic, reminds people to get vaccinated at every service, etc. Just more a "don't go onto someone's facebook wall and call them names because of their political affiliation". 

[mom2scouts]

2 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

I've been hearing for years how the "liberal" mainline churches are all dying. But that's actually not true. We sometimes attend an Episcopal church. They have young families. They are full on Sunday. And they even open the Bible. 

I think it's kind of unfair to say that a mainline church "barely even opened the Bible." I think we all know that isn't true. 

I also know many people, including myself, who have left conservative churches since 2016. 

I was relating my personal experience as someone who grew up in a denomination and stayed there (in a different church) for years as an adult. There were almost no other young families when I was there and even less now. They had NO Bible studies at all going on and the sermon was sometimes loosely based on a bunch of short verses. It's one of the reasons we left, so it's not unfair to tell you my experience in that church.

[mom2scouts]

1 hour ago, gardenmom5 said:

I'm tired of it too  - and I'm conservative.   leave the politics at the door.  

We're not following politicians/political-parties.   - we're supposed to be followers of Jesus Christ - who transcends politics.   I'd rather put my focus on that, and actually doing my best to practice what He preached.  I think I can be a better influence for good that way too.  I hope.

My church leaders never talk politics. I have absolutely no idea how my pastors vote. There's probably a good mix of political opinions among the staff.

[gardenmom5]

25 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

But how do you leave politics at the door of the church? Just like how do you leave religion at the door of the polling station? These are fundamental parts of who we are. 

We don't discuss politics at church  (members might between themselves, but is not over the pulpit or by local - or general - leaders.  Our general leaders occasionally will speak on specific legislation, but never endorse a political party or candidate. ) -  At church, we learn about eternal gospel truths, correct principles, the commandments of God.  We are expected to implement those things in our daily lives.   Those are not political.   

Politics are of the world, not of God. But they're what we're stuck with right now.  (When Christ rules on earth - it will be a benevolent monarchy.  Not a political system.)  In my church - education is strongly encouraged (for many reasons.). People who have a solid religious foundation, who have an education on how economies work, on what is moral, on what strengthens people and families,  - and communities - etc  will do their best to vote for a candidate that will promote those things in their town/county/state/country.  Of course, today - choices on both sides of the political spectrum are often poor. (at best.)  Very polarized.  The bible mentions that polarization  . . . 

Those things which divide - are not of God.  Just because someone has opposite views - doesn't give anyone permission to treat the other side with disrespect.   

I'm not going to get into politics in this post -   I've seen rank hypocrisy on BOTH political sides. (it merely takes different forms.)  Sort of like when I first started homeschooling.  I joined two different yahoo groups which claimed to follow Story of the World.  One group was religious - one group was atheist. .  It amazed me how much time they each spent bashing the other group, rather focusing on what they were supposedly to be doing.  Learning the best ways to teach their children.  They really were - two sides of the same coin, and neither group was worthy of emulation.

 

[gardenmom5]

31 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

 
t sounds nice. It's not bad. It's just that kind of language is used to justify so many bad things in religious communities. 

 

frankly - religious people treating other's poorly (whether they are a different race, nationality, or religion) - are not following Jesus Christ.  (or the bible.)  I've see this on both sides of the political spectrum.   Or are you denying the  - as an example - conservatives who have been attacked in restaurants - because they were conservative?  

[ktgrok]

56 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Names like "racist?" Maybe that was accurate? 

Like I wrote, it sounds nice. It's not bad. It's just that kind of language is used to justify so many bad things in religious communities. 

How do we discuss masks in a way that is truthful and not hurtful? We can't even discuss it that one way on this forum and I think people have been very truthful. There are fundamental disagreements between that are based on far more than a mask. Feelings are going to be hurt. 

We have this idea that everyone should be civil. That's not necessarily wrong. But how can you be civil with a fascist or a racist? How? One side is always asked to make the peace. 

So you have a discussion with a supporter of Orban and then go out to dinner afterwards? No, we don't do that. You don't need to go onto his Facebook wall and tell him that he's a fascist. But if you are discussing something on Facebook maybe you're truthful and tell him that he's a fascist? My solution to this problem is to not engage with anyone who is an Orban supporter or whatever. 

People are dividing up and that's not necessarily a bad thing. It can be painful. But divides happen when people stand up for things. 

Well, I mean the people were attending an open and affirming progressive church, that has taken stands on a lot of issues lncluding civil rights, gay marriage, etc and was one of the first to require masks. So there was already middle ground, you know? And I'm sure that the pastor wasn't saying not to say, push mask wearing, because he does. And he says hard stuff in the sermons. I know what you are talking about, the "be nice and be quiet" thing, and this was not that. Not by a long shot. 

[Faith-manor]

Deleted. Posted on the wrong thread.

Edited October 11, 2021 by Faith-manor

[HS Mom in NC]

19 hours ago, mom2scouts said:

 If lives were being changed and just as many other lives were being ruined doesn't that equal a net of zero effectiveness?

That's not how spiritual matters work. Spiritual matters aren't simple math. Galatians 5 goes into detail on what happens when we get caught up in legalism and ignore the truth of grace and the gospel.  Sin grows and contaminates.  That's why in verse 9 he says, "A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough." That's why we warned us to be on watch for these things.  And when Jesus talked about it being better to have a stone around your neck and being thrown into a body of water than to lead a little one into sin, I think it's keeping the spirit of it to apply that to spiritually immature people who don't have discernment, knowledge, and experience to know when they're being deceived.   That's what elders are for-to keep watch for and prepare themselves to deal with wolves.  They didn't.

In the interviews someone mentioned that many people walked away not just from that local congregation, but Christianity all together. It wasn't just Josh Harris. It's one thing if a professing believer does that all on their own surrounded by solid examples of Christianity and solid teaching and solid discipleship-that's on them to address with God themselves as we continue to love them the same way we did before.  (My husband is one of those people.)   But to be a contributor to a professing believer's struggles is a terrible thing. Misrepresenting the nature of God and The Church to traumatize and victimize those in his care as a pastor most certainly does not amount to "a net of zero effectiveness."

[ktgrok]

17 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Here's the thing - avoiding politics is a political choice in a democracy. 

And things that divide can be from God. The Civil Rights movement divided people. Was it not from God? 

What is treating someone with disrespect? Telling them that they're wrong or that they're racist or homophobic or whatever? 

The idea that God doesn't want us to be involved in politics is political. It's a political idea because it helps to maintain the status quo. How are the things we do in our daily lives "not political?" Is it "political" to believe that black lives matter? Was MLK "political?" 

But we can frame it as discussing individual issues, and the ethics of them, without using political terminology or telling people who to vote for. 

I expect my church to talk about human rights issues, etc. But not to say "this party is evil" or "you can't vote for so and so". 

[Sneezyone]

 

1 hour ago, ktgrok said:

But we can frame it as discussing individual issues, and the ethics of them, without using political terminology or telling people who to vote for. 

I expect my church to talk about human rights issues, etc. But not to say "this party is evil" or "you can't vote for so and so". 

I expect my pastor to talk about a variety of ethical issues. I anticipate at any given time that I'll agree with some and be convicted by some b/c the Bible doesn't lineup with any particular US political view. So when/if I find myself sitting under the teaching of someone who tells me only things I agree with, I'm immediately suspect. If the messenger is selecting verses out of context to weave a narrative inconsistent with the totality of scripture, I'm also immediately suspect. The example I gave earlier from my Dad's church was like that. I nodded along with his message about the need/biblical imperative to fellowship with like-minded people and also silently lost my -ish when it veered into the need to do that in-person, unmasked, and damn the health consequences. That's not biblical. I also do not like politician visits, church voter guides, or tacit endorsements of any kind. At Mars Hill, all kinds of red flags were raised and alarm bells went off just listening to the snippets of sermons in the podcast.

Edited October 8, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Jean in Newcastle]

I want verse by verse teaching of actual Bible passages. I want them explained in a way that makes it understandable to a modern audience with the appropriate background information and broader context given. But neither the pastor nor the church itself is qualified to apply scripture to my life. That’s God the Holy Spirit’s job. So while my faith informs my life, including the principles I use to make political decisions, it is not a political faith. My true citizenship (from a biblical perspective) is in heaven, not anywhere on earth. (I do believe that I have a secular civic duty to vote.).