At Greater Grace's evening on Sunday July 22, 2007, Steve Scibelli preached the main sermon, titled "Soul Power - Give it a Rest". Before he got up to speak, Tom Schaller preached a brief introductory sermon. I listened to the entire introduction twice, and many passages several more times; I am confident that the following transcript, grammar and all, is at least 99% accurate.

The bold text is Schaller's sermon.

My comments are the italicized paragraphs.

======================

Tom,

As a preacher, you do not get into the pulpit and speak words merely to hear yourself talk. Rather, you preach with a goal, an objective in mind. You want the hearers to listen to what you are saying, process and think about what you're saying, and then act upon it. Those actions may merely be additional meditation on your words, or much more. As this sermon makes clear, those actions should affect they way your hearers think about people near and dear to them, how they act around them, how they speak to them, and perhaps whether they even take overt actions to totally cut them out of their lives altogether.

Before Pastor Scibelli comes up, I want to just share a few words with you from my heart with you, to you, on this subject of soul power and spirit power...

In our ministry in the last few years, we have witnessed the work of the Holy Spirit in a ministry as we have witnessed the moving, the definition, Wednesday night on Abraham giving Isaac I got a lot of good feed back on my answering machine and telephone and the cell phone and, I just wanna share.

"we have witnessed the work of the Holy Spirit..." By what means would an impartial observer be able to conclude that indeed these events were the work of the Holy Spirit? Because someone they don't know and thus have no reason to trust tells them so? Not good enough. What are the criteria a normal, intelligent thinking person who is not part of your system may use to know this?

A couple years ago, uh, 3, 4, 5 years ago, there was a great group of us men, pastors, that were serving God faithfully through the years together. But in time and circumstance, there were decisions made and people went in different directions, as many of you know. But there was also a group of people and this is a testimony of spiritual power, that said in their hearts, and they followed, and believed, and worshipped, and in a mystical way, by only the power of the Holy Spirit, were we able to stay together on the right foundation.

You imply that those who remained as faithful and loyal followers of Tom Schaller and the "legacy" of Carl Stevens are the only ones who remained on the right foundation. Also implying that the great group of pastors you once co-labored with who no longer name the names of the gg pantheon, those who made decisions to go in different directions, they all went in the wrong direction.

And this is not the foundation of Apollos or Cephas or Paul or even Christ. You know the full portion. Let's turn there...

I Cor. 1 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I am of Apollos; and I am of Cephas; and I have Christ.

Let's put in there some names and make it really relevant. "I am of Pastor Scibelli. I am of Pastor Love. I am of Pastor Schaller. I am of Dr. Stevens. I am not even of any of those, I am of Christ."

Having read the verse, plugged in your own names, what's your point? I remember a couple years ago, telling a "faithful" gg sycophant that an important leader had just resigned from the church. He exclaimed, "What does that mean? Is he still with us?" I asked, "Who is us?" He replied, "You know -- the ministry, Pastor Stevens."

Not, "Is he still following Christ? Is he still serving God?" But is he still with Stevens and company.

Tom, I've had members of your church admit to me that they see problems in your church, they're unhappy about things, don't like the way things are going, but they'd never, ever leave. Why? Because they're "called to the ministry." They are incapable of thinking of themselves and a call to God as anything distinct from a call to "the ministry."

The soul of man has horizontal attachments, and people is [sic] a big issue, because we are people orientated. Listen. And this is just brief. The Lord said to Ezekiel, Tomorrow, your wife will die, and do not mourn for her. Then the Scripture said, and the next day his wife died, and he did not mourn for her.

Every first year homiletics student is taught the importance of making an application of what they're preaching. So what's your application, your point? If friends and families have been divided over the teaching of gg, faithfulness to "the ministry" means they should not seek reconciliation? Should your church members (those to whom you were preaching) count those who made decisions to go in different directions as being dead to them (as Carl Stevens has even done with most of his own children) and not mourn the loss?

Why did God say that to Ezekiel? Because God wanted to use it as an example of how Israel has died for him, God. And God is not weeping about it. He is detached. This detachment is an amazing work of grace by the Holy Spirit.

Israel has died for God? What?!

And the God of love is so detached, and the application of grace is "detachment" when someone has died?! Shame on you, Thomas Schaller. Shame on you. (detachment: Indifference to or remoteness from the concerns of others; aloofness, as in: "...preserved a chilly detachment in his relations with the family.") God allowed Israel to spend an entire month mourning the death of Moses. Yet you presume to teach your church that they should be indifferent to the death of their own family members -- even if the "death" is simply that they've stopped attending your church? Shame on you.

God said to Moses, "Go back to Egypt." And, and I would say, "Are you kidding? I'm not going back there. God, I'm not going back there to Egypt. I'm not going back there." But Moses went back there.

I think there are people that have left our assembly, gone out there, and God could say to them, "Go back there." And they go, "Are you kidding me? I'm not going back there. No, I'm not going back there." What is that? That is soul power.

There's just so much wrong with that one brief paragraph. Every other time, you guys use Egypt to represent "the flesh, the old life or independence from God." But because you want to talk about someone returning to your church, suddenly Egypt represents ggwo? WTF?!

I recognize that, like Humpty Dumpty, you claim the right to apply your own new meaning to words whenever it suits your purpose. What school of hermeneutics is that doctrine based on? What theological tradition allows for such a method of interpretation?

Or is what you constantly refer to as "mystical" merely your interpretation of Transcendentalism? Are you a fan of Emerson? He's often quoted as saying, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day."

Does your mysticism allow you to ascribe one meaning to a word or verse today, and then a totally different meaning tomorrow? Exactly how does this work? What hermeneutic principle allows for this?

God "could" say to them... Exactly who is it you're talking about? Is there a specific person or group of people you have in mind? If so -- why not state it clearly? If not -- why do you make up such things, putting the fear of the bogeyman in your congregants?

Best conclusion and application I can make of that last paragraph is that you're saying that not only are those who left now going in the wrong direction, they're also all living in "soul power." No where in this short sermon do you even pretend to define soul power, yet you use the word as if it means anyone living in it is obviously evil and demonized.

Referencing any conservative evangelical teaching, can you suggest anyone (besides you and Watchman Nee) in contemporary or historical Christianity who teaches this "soul power" theology?

I make my decisions. I choose my relationships. And even I choose a man, here, in the Scripture, "I am of Apollos, I am of Cephas." But Paul answered, "Is Christ divided?" Listen to this. He said, "Was Paul crucified for you?"

What? If I, a thrice ordained pastor and diligent student of both the Bible and the English language have such a hard time following you, how can the average church member possibly keep up? -- Who is "I" in these sentences? Who is speaking? You? Whomever it is you're accusing via innuendo? Where are you in this example? Didn't you choose a man, Carl Stevens? How many years has he been your primary influence, to the exclusion of all other human teachers?

You're making too big of a deal out of it. Was Paul crucified for you? It's too big of a deal, because you have a soulish orientation and not a spiritual one. Because the issue is not the man. The issue is the spiritual power that is in the assembly and is leading us in a divine plan.

Who is the "you" that's making too big of a deal, and who is speaking? Are you channeling God here, and He is rebuking those who went in that different direction and thus fell off the "right" foundation of GG?

There are plenty of places and plenty of religions where one can find "spiritual power." What chapter and verse do you appeal to when you claim this as "proof" of your spirituality and fidelity to the Bible? Isn't it supposed to be about obedience to the scriptures, and not about some mystical, ethereal "manifestation of spiritual power"?

Last one. John the Baptist was a prophet for a year and a half. And he didn't do any miracle. And he could say, "Lord I'm a prophet. Come on. Pour it on. Use me. Come on. Use me. All I'm doing is eating grasshoppers and honey, out here in the desert. You think that's like the power of God, you think that that is like really honoring the prophecy, the prophethood?" And the Lord is saying, there was not a greater prophet, 'cause this man had the Holy Spirit on him, l and this man introduced Christ into the world, and that was his mission.

What?! John the Baptist "could" say? But he didn't, did he? He's never quoted in the Bible as seeming to be disgruntled with "not being used." In fact, the Biblical teaching is just the opposite, isn't it? He was content to decrease, to not be the focal point of attention. What gives you the authority to invent scenarios that "could" have but never did happen, just so you can use it as an example when you need one?

Unlike John the Baptist, when you were asked "if Steve Stevens wins the election and is voted in as pastor of gg, will you support him?" how did you answer? I was there -- I remember. You made no pretence of a willingness to "decrease" in order that Jesus might "increase." Rather, you made it very clear -- your call is to be the head pastor of gg, and if you were not placed into that office, you would leave. Was it a threat, designed to help "persuade" any who were vacillating?

But some of you, and me, would be disappointed in the plan of God, because in our soul power we want to serve God. "Come on, use me, pour it on. You're not using me? Okay - forget it. It's not my program? My way? You know, the way it's supposed to be? Lightning from heaven, and putting people on fire, and me rebuking pharaoh, and, and the Red Sea dividing and healing people? Then actually, I don't wanna do it."

The last few times I heard you speak in person, you were making these same allusions -- that those who left your church were somehow mad that they weren't being used, and they left in anger. Where did you get this? i.e.: what proof do you have for such slanderous, fabricated charges? Specifically -- who did this?

Here are many pages of documentation as to the grievances of those pastors, those who "were serving God faithfully through the years together" with you, and why they eventually disaffiliated from you and your church. Those Sandy Cove documents, signed and thus agreed with by you, list many things wrong with gg and Stevensism. Sour grapes of "not being used" doesn't seem to appear on the list of sins and errors.

And the Lord will say, "That's you, and that's exactly what needs to be crucified."

And some of you will say, "I don't want to lose my friends."

And this clear, overt threat you're making is the very reason many members of gg are still there. They don't want to lose their friends, other members of gg. So while they privately, secretly confess that they are unhappy and that they don't agree with everything you teach, they remain in your church. Many are middle aged, and have been part of your church from their youth. Because of your very small world, their children's friends are all there. These people long ago cut off family, abandoned educational opportunities, forsook friends and left promising careers. All because they were true believers whose zeal for God was abused by duplicitous kingdom builders.

Some have had family members die before they woke up and could reconcile with them. I know -- I've had several tell me their personal stories. They will go to their graves sorrowing over that. Yet you teach that if they were truly spiritual, they wouldn't mourn the loss, they would stoically remain detached. How dare you? Is this how you fulfill the role of a shepherd? Is this how you reveal the "unconditional" love of God?

Then again, why should I be surprised? Truly, you are of your father Carl Stevens, and the deeds of your father you will do.

You know what? It might be good for you to say to your friend the truth. Open rebuke is better than secret love. And it might be good for you and I to stand right in the face of our friends and to say to them with the love of God, "ummm.... I.... the Lord has shown me something, and I am sure about where I am at. And I enjoy it. And there is rain coming down from heaven. And there is a sweet stillness and a peace in the heart. And I'll see you later. I'm not against you. I love you. But I can't sit here and talk foolishness."

Here's something on which we can agree! Open rebuke. Tom, I went to you alone. I went to you in the presence of others. My words fell on deaf ears. In your world, terms like "agree to disagree" or -- shudders -- the crazy possibility that you, Carl Stevens, bs and gg could ever be wrong about anything simply have no place. In your world, any disagreement with you is synonymous with someone spitting on the Bible and personally driving the nails into Jesus' hands and feet.

So here's my letter of open rebuke. I won't, as you do, pretend to have a pipeline to God, receiving revelations from the throne as the basis for my statements. I'll simply tell you that the many shattered lives left in the wake of bs and gg is proof enough to validate my charges.

Because we are living in the Holy Spirit of God. And the power of God. That's why our ministry has a divine blessing, and we guard it. And if you and I become soulish, and we replace the spirit, and truth, and the cross, with our plan, our agenda, our relationships, our own ideas, and people, then we would say, "No, we, we don't have time. We really have something from God."

And that's what I love about what is happening. I can sit with these men over here, and be with them every day, and I can feel it. And we can feel it. We can say, "Wow. This is it. Man."

And even if there was some disturbance or something, that is nothing to spiritual people. Even if there is an earthquake, it is, it is nothing, it's not a spiritual, I'm just saying, to people who walk through fire, this is the work of God's grace. Amen.

What a disservice you do to the work of God's grace. Amen.

___________________________________
edited to reformat for better legibility

Thanks, John, for this. If more of Schaller's speeches were transcribed word for word, it would be too easy to see the lack of substance in what he says. These poor people are given no nourishment. What a crime. He has been starving them for so long that they no longer have the strength to tell right from wrong.

Why would he have to attack us still? It shows that he is still greatly bothered by us. That we are still making more of a difference on GGWO than we may think. He is trying to find reasons to justisfy his actions.

Good work John. This type of **** has gone on too long.

Your rage isn't going to make a difference. Use the energy to do something about it.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”


“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master – that’s all.”

Alice was too much puzzled to say anything, so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. “They’ve a temper, some of them – particularly verbs, they’re the proudest – adjectives you do anything with, but not verbs – however, I can manage the whole lot them! Impenetrability! That’s what I say!”

“Would you tell me, please,” said Alice, “what that means?”

Humpty Dumpty gave a lengthy explanation of what he meant by the word.

“That’s a great deal to make one word mean,” Alice said in a thoughtful tone.

“When I make a word do a lot of work like that,” said Humpty Dumpty, “I always pay it extra"

This is interesting, but can someone explain what it's got to do with this thread? Thanks.

Won't make a difference in what they preach? You're right, it won't.

This exercise did a lot of good, for me. Maybe for one or two others who read it. Maybe for one or two on the fence, who know that something there just isn't quite right but can't put their finger on it.

What do you have in mind when you referring to doing "something" about it?

In my initial comments on Schaller's sermon above, I wrote, "I recognize that, like Humpty Dumpty, you claim the right to apply your own new meaning to words whenever it suits your purpose. What school of hermeneutics is that doctrine based on? What theological tradition allows for such a method of interpretation?"

Don't know who posted the Humpty Dumpty quote, but -- thanks! That's exactly what I had in mind! :)

Sorry, John, I wasn't referring to you but to "Heathen Rage."

What do I have in mind? You tell me. I bet you have some decent ideas.

"A couple years ago, uh, 3, 4, 5 years ago, there was a great group of us men, pastors, that were serving God faithfully through the years together. But in time and circumstance, there were decisions made and people went in different directions, as many of you know. But there was also a group of people and this is a testimony of spiritual power, that said in their hearts, and they followed, and believed, and worshipped, and in a mystical way, by only the power of the Holy Spirit, were we able to stay together on the right foundation."

Well, there was a great group of men. Just a group of GREAT MEN OF GOD...Women don't have too much to do or say around here it seems. They have nice boobs though...

And of course, the truly mystical people, the ones who really have the POWER, they stayed. "ON THE RIGHT FOUNDATION." And of course that means everyone who left is WRONG, out of the Will Of God, and lacks the true power of God in their lives.

Now I remember why I left, you bunch of arrogant, deceived, hypocritical, lying morons...

Come on, Reader, you never forgot why you left. But their arrogance is never-ending, like the bottomless pit--it goes on and on, a "continuing revelation."

Deleted previous comment.

Created a new thread.

Daved

The topic of this thread was started by John Collins on a message that Schaller preached at the end of July. If you would like to bring up another subject, you can start another thread.

Sorry John, it was hard to follow the actual message because of the lengthy comments in between. Is it OK if I place just the message here? Here it comes:


Sunday July 22, 2007 evening service introduction by pastor Thomas Schaller

Before Pastor Scibelli comes up, I want to just share a few words with you from my heart with you, to you, on this subject of soul power and spirit power...

In our ministry in the last few years, we have witnessed the work of the Holy Spirit in a ministry as we have witnessed the moving, the definition, Wednesday night on Abraham giving Isaac I got a lot of good feedback on my answering machine and telephone and the cellphone and, I just wanna share.

A couple years ago, uh, 3, 4, 5 years ago, there was a great group of us men, pastors, that were serving God faithfully through the years together. But in time and circumstance, there were decisions made and people went in different directions, as many of you know. But there was also a group of people and this is a testimony of spiritual power that said in their hearts, and they followed, and believed, and worshipped, and in a mystical way, by only the power of the Holy Spirit, were we able to stay together on the right foundation.

And this is not the foundation of Apollos or Cephas or Paul or even Christ. You know the full portion. Let's turn there...

I Cor. 1 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I am of Apollos; and I am of Cephas; and I have Christ.

Let's put in there some names and make it really relevant. "I am of Pastor Scibelli. I am of Pastor Love. I am of Pastor Schaller. I am of Dr. Stevens. I am not even of any of those, I am of Christ."

The soul of man has horizontal attachments, and people is a big issue, because we are people orientated. Listen. And this is just brief. The Lord said to Ezekiel, Tomorrow, your wife will die, and do not mourn for her. Then the Scripture said, and the next day his wife died, and he did not mourn for her.

Why did God say that to Ezekiel? Because God wanted to use it as an example of how Israel has died for him, God. And God is not weeping about it. He is detached. This detachment is an amazing work of grace by the Holy Spirit.

God said to Moses, "Go back to Egypt." And, and I would say, "Are you kidding? I'm not going back there. God, I'm not going back there to Egypt. I'm not going back there." But Moses went back there.

I think there are people that have left our assembly, gone out there, and God could say to them, "Go back there." And they go, "Are you kidding me? I'm not going back there. No, I'm not going back there." What is that? That is soul power.

I make my decisions. I choose my relationships. And even I choose a man, here, in the Scripture, "I am of Apollos, I am of Cephas." But Paul answered, "Is Christ divided?" Listen to this. He said, "Was Paul crucified for you?"

You're making too big of a deal out of it. Was Paul crucified for you? It's too big of a deal, because you have a soulish orientation and not a spiritual one. Because the issue is not the man. The issue is the spiritual power that is in the assembly and is leading us in a divine plan.

Last one. John the Baptist was a prophet for a year and a half. And he didn't do any miracle. And he could say, "Lord I'm a prophet. Come on. Pour it on. Use me. Come on. Use me. All I'm doing is eating grasshoppers and honey, out here in the desert. You think that's like the power of God, you think that that is like really honoring the prophecy, the prophethood?" And the Lord is saying, there was not a greater prophet, 'cause this man had the Holy Spirit on him, l and this man introduced Christ into the world, and that was his mission.

But some of you, and me, would be disappointed in the plan of God, because in our soul power we want to serve God. "Come on, use me, pour it on. You're not using me? Okay - forget it. It's not my program? My way? You know, the way it's supposed to be? Lightning from heaven, and putting people on fire, and me rebuking pharaoh, and, and the Red Sea dividing and healing people? Then actually, I don't wanna do it."

And the Lord will say, "That's you, and that's exactly what needs to be crucified."

And some of you will say, "I don't want to lose my friends."

You know what? It might be good for you to say to your friend the truth. Open rebuke is better than secret love. And it might be good for you and I to stand right in the face of our friends and to say to them with the love of God, "ummm.... I.... the Lord has shown me something, and I am sure about where I am at. And I enjoy it. And there is rain coming down from heaven. And there is a sweet stillness and a peace in the heart. And I'll see you later. I'm not against you. I love you. But I can't sit here and talk foolishness."

Because we are living in the Holy Spirit of God. And the power of God. That's why our ministry has a divine blessing, and we guard it. And if you and I become soulish, and we replace the spirit, and truth, and the cross, with our plan, our agenda, our relationships, our own ideas, and people, then we would say, "No, we, we don't have time. We really have something from God."

And that's what I love about what is happening. I can sit with these men over here, and be with them every day, and I can feel it. And we can feel it. We can say, "Wow. This is it. Man."

And even if there was some disturbance or something, that is nothing to spiritual people. Even if there is an earthquake, it is, it is nothing, it's not a spiritual, I'm just saying, to people who walk through fire, this is the work of God's grace. Amen.

It was my understanding that Pastor Morrison was a point of contact for their 'newly formed' fellowship of equals (?).

I would suggest writing him, cc: Schaller and the GGWO elders and see if you get any response.
Your commentary and assesment are exactly right, John.

I will stand with you if you decide to write him, or we could conference call him.

Jerry

I read through this thing a couple of times.

It doesn't make any sense to me. There is no gestalt. Seriously, the closest thing I can find to compare this to is here:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=WALIARHHLII

(I included the version with helpful subtitles. If you think her answer made any sense at all, by all means head on down to the Plaza. They're saving a seat for you!)

It's not that I think the ideas contained in this "sermon" are off the wall (and I suppose they are), I can't understand what in the wide world of sports this guy is trying to say. It contains too much GGWO-Speak.

The congregation laps it up, though. It fulfills some need in their lives and they don't question it. What happens when a new person comes to GGWO? Do they ever ask "what in the FUCK did you just say, Pastor Schaller/Stevens/etc?"

I suppose when you have member of your congregation (past or present) that is obsessed over God's name, trying to make sense of things like this "sermon" sort of takes a back seat, doesn't it?

What kind of questions do people have in their lives where they think the answer is listening to bullshit like this?

I'd parse Schaller's discourse for ya, Boss, and show how it doesn't follow logic, but to tell you the truth, it would make me too sick.

Good point. I considered that as I posted it, but didn't think about first posting just the sermon transcript, followed by the annotations. At this point, what do you (anyone) think? Should I add the sermon transcript by itself to the beginning of the post that opens this thread? Or just leave it as is at this point?

Boss: Is there really a lot of gg jargon in Schaller's sermon? I thought the real problem was the load of implication and innuendo, leaving the non-initiated one in the dark. i.e.: many things not overtly stated, so the door's open for the plausible deniability of "I never said that!" Yet all the insiders know what is being implied, and respond accordingly.

This also explains why questions such as I asked are seldom/never actually vocalized in a gg rap session -- the mere posing of the question gets the questioner condemned for a lack of faith, lack of trust in the leaders, lack of spirituality, etc. No one wants to be the little boy admitting the emperor is naked, so everyone goes along...

John,

It's not so much the GGWO-Speak, although during my twenty-plus years of faithfully attending a Southern Baptist church three times a week, the term "soul power" never came up. It's just the question of what he's trying to say. Without your analysis, I couldn't really determine what Schaller's point was. There were a lot of strange phrases, but the "sermon" didn't appear to go anywhere.

When I was still friends with the woman from the gym, she would give me tapes of Carl's "sermons" and tell me that "this message REALLY meant a lot to me". They meant nothing to me! Remember, at that time, I was still a Christian. I've been moved by sermons in my life. Further, I might not have agreed with the sermons of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, etc, but THEY MADE SENSE! I could understand the point they were trying to make whether I agreed with it or not. Schaller and Stevens, I don't understand.

The reason websites like this exist is because of the years of not being allowed to question anything...

Boss, you don't get Scibelli and Schaller precisely because you are still a Christian.

I know you mean well about this, guest, but I'm really not a Christian any more.

I will never find genocide acceptable under any circumstances. (Numbers 31)

I will never advocate slavery. (Supported as Godly EVERYWHERE in the Bible.)

I will never follow someone that claims that they speak for God. (Apostle Paul, the Pope, Carl Stevens, Benny Hinn, you name 'em)

I don't find the story of Abraham and Isaac to be anything more than horrifying. I don't find this to an example of any "love" that I'm interested in nor do I see any purpose in it.

I don't see the "beauty and perfection" in leaving the equivalent of a loaded gun in a baby's bed (the Tree in the Garden of Eden), then creating a creature to tempt Eve (the serpent), then punishing mankind forever because one person screwed up, then claiming "I love you, but I will torture you forever if you don't love me back". Oh yeah, I find it hard to think that anyone loves me if they say I'm totally depraved. (Look up the meaning of the word "depraved".)

I don't care what God's name is.

I don't even see the purpose of Christianity if God has already pre-ordained some people to spend eternity in hell even if they believe they're saved or if they die as a baby. This means that any of you reading this who think you're saved may be headed to hell because you're not in the "elect". Babies are burning and screaming for eternity because they're not in the "elect". On the other hand, Ted Bundy may be sitting at God's right hand, not because he accepted Christ, but because he was one of the elect and thus predestined for salvation. If God has already made up his mind, what's the use?

I'm tired of the "Santa Claus" excuses. You know, like "well the reason that God said that women are unclean after childbirth is because of health reasons. Oh, you want to know why women are unclean for a longer period of time when they have a female child? You just have a hard heart, etc." The questions are answered to fit percieved and hoped for reality, just like Santa Claus.

"How will I get toys, we don't have a chimney?"

"Uh, we leave a window open."

Why is there a Santa at the Mall and another Santa at the grocery store?"

"They are Santa's assistants."

These are honest questions with bullshit answers, but if your goal is to preserve the Santa Claus myth, then those anwers are acceptable.

I'm happy where I am. I was pretty happy with Christianity until I found out the history of my old denomination (Southern Baptist). I gave it another shot when I met the woman from GGWO. What I've found is that to be a "good" Christian, you really do need to give a rat's ass about what God's name is. I also found that for Christianity to work, you need to have a Carl Stevens, Benny Hinn, or someone else who has been talking to God FOR YOU, and will lay down the rules FOR YOU, and TELL you how to believe.

This is what my GGWO experience has shown me.

Schaller's message tells us two things. Schaller does not prepare his messages and gg has not changed at all.

Boss, when I think of the word Christian, I don't like to label myself as such that you have described either. Today in her ignorance, a co-worker of mine, who professed to be a Christian pointed the finger at another co-worker for not going to church in 10 years, and stated that she had no reason or desire to learn about any other kind of religion because of what she learns at church. I felt ashamed to call myself that kind of Christian.

When I think of the word, Christian, I want to be labeled as a Christ-follower. Not a Christ imitator. I hope that when people see my life, they see Christ in me through my words and my actions, not because I go to church, read my Bible, pray in public, quote scriptures, etc. That is what the Pharisees did.

I can see GG as being Pharisaical (not to take away from the cult factor). They are always boasting about what work they have done, how many souls THEY saved, how many countries THEY have impacted. The Pharisees would point out the faults of others. This is how GG operates. THEY point out what THEY consider our "faults" and "mistakes".. i e: leaving GG, speaking out about GG, and warning others about their manipulations.

So, Boss, I hope that you will consider yourself to be a Christ-follower to the best of your ability, and not a "Christian"..

I have a Jefferson Bible that I bought a few years ago. Thomas Jefferson compiled all of the sayings of Jesus, minus the miracles. It's mostly just Jesus' words. Other than Jesus' comment about dogs and crumbs, I think he had a lot of wise things to say. In that sense, I would be happy if I could follow the example of Jesus.

And don't forget Boss, Jesus loves you. Yep.

Sometimes when I think of talking to someone who doesn't profess to be a christian I think of the scene in Lt. Dan's NYC apartment in the film Forest Gump. "Have you found Jesus yet Gump...?"

I guess I've been waiting for the subject WHAT IS A CHRISTIAN to come up for about 18 months now. What exactly is a christian anyway?

Someone who believes in Christ. Jesus said he was a messenger of God and I just believe it. That word believe is in it's simplest form, Believe. JUST DO IT.

There's been quite a few, well more than a few posts complaining about the hypocracy (a nice way to say bullshit..."you will have your portion with the bullshitters") and blatent manipulation and theivery that goes on in churches that profess to be "christian." Rightfully so. But yes that has nothing to do with what it means to believe in Jesus.

I think you just believe it and that's it. I agree that it produces a change in your life. (I don't think that change means you become a know it all asshole who condemns everybody and everything while quoting scripture out of context to support your calvinist/arminianist/catholic/latest book that I read/fill in the blank point of view. I really don't know what that is or why anybody is into it.)

But I think you change. Somehow, life was never the same for me after that. The change is you think about God now, where before you didn't. I think about God now...alot.

And I think true believers are really decent people. I think that's how you can tell them apart.

I see shows on CNN and similar cable station talking about God..."How do we know there's a God?" etc. I guess it's more like the politics of God, another thing that truly has nothing to do with what it really means to be a christian. But if I could be on one of those shows this is what I would say:

"Well, Jesus taught that the human race should 'love their neighbors as they love themselves.' Treat everyone you meet, work with, and live with the same way you would like to be treated. What kind of a world would it be if everybody did that?"

Exactly. I think Keith Green said, "going to church doesn't make you a Christian anymore than going to McDonald's makes you a hamburger." The bottom line is the source of my faith and what that does for my life. It is not what group I belong to, or what pet doctrines that turn me into a Pharisee.

You're right, when you get saved, you don't become a know-it-all asshole, thats something you learn, at a church. When I first got saved, I felt like I was literally born again. I didn't have this "hit rock bottom" conversion where I got down on my knees and told God I would seek Him. I just had this whole new life and mentallity that was so freeing from what I was doing. I did't learn that not all Christians are equall until later. I didn't learn to look at other with ridicule until I started going to church. Then I learned the difference between sinner and saint, which is the difference between love and hate. Maybe then I almost forgot to be human, and reserved my compassion for the former while gloating over the latter.

I do believe it is important to get together with other Christians and fellowship, but that doesn't mean a "Church". Where does it say I have to do to the "First Bapticostal Church of Plastic Hair", or "Our Lady or Perpetual Sorrow"?

I am with you, Christian means "Follower of Christ", not "Titheing Submitted Member".

Go to a lot of churches and you'll get a good look at what Christianity is NOT, and what God is NOT!!!!!

Go to a lot of churches and learn how to manipulate others to follow you and your own desires over God. Tell them all about this delegated authority given to the pastor.

Brainwash people to think serving you is serving God.

Learn how to be a hypocrite and a user and coerce others to cover up for you and never question you on anything.

Learn how to put others under many burdening rules that your not willing to keep yourself.

Learn how to preach to others about humility and remain really stuck up yourself and still keep a straight face.

Tell others that they better hand over at least ten percent of their gross pay to you or they're robbing God and will be severely punished for it. Then spend the peoples' hard earned money on your own selfish interests.

But please, can we remember that the church as bad as some are, like Israel in the bible, is still the Bride of Christ.

No, we can remember that the Body is the collection of believers on the earth. It is not: any building, any organization, any pastors ministry or vision, any board of elders nor is it defined by a member ship roll or a tithe balance.

Great Grace is not the Body, Calvary Chapel is not the Body. The people in those places apart from all things except the commonality of being Christians (followers of Christ) IS the Body.

I say body as also meaning bride. Unless you are one that belives there is a seperate group outside the "regular" body that is called out as the bride you'd agree if not we're on to another topic.

We are in agreement--but then it brings up the question:

Are all churches who call themselves Christian and say they follow the bible a part of the Body of Christ?

Are all individuals who make the same claims a part of the Body of Christ?

Are some of these nutty, stupid people on television our nutty, stupid relatives in Christ?

I owe it to love them. I don't have to fellowship with them.

I don't want to sow discord, division, within the Body of Christ while this lost world gets to be spectators and laugh and jeer.

It's easy to get upset about these idiot children. But if I lose my cool, I lose my credibility.

But I think that many organized evangelical churches are getting old and too self-assured and forgetting their first love. I wouldn't chose to be a part of them, but I won't go out of my way to rip them apart unless they are trying to rip me and my friends apart.

These are not easy questions and the answers are even more challenging.

Are all churches who call themselves Christian and say they follow the bible a part of the Body of Christ?

No, all the people that choose to go to this location are part of the body. Christ in them is what makes it so. Whether they go this building or that, they are part of the Body.


Are all individuals who make the same claims a part of the Body of Christ?

If someone says they are saved, who can prove otherwise?

Now what if they are doing something that does not jive with your Christianity, then what do you do? I think that is the real hard question. The traditional action has been to seperate yourself with others that think just like you. Hence, we have denominations out the wazoo and a church on every corner.

Are some of these nutty, stupid people on television our nutty, stupid relatives in Christ?

Again, if they claim to be saved, who but God can deny it? If these people on TV are nutters, and if the people are following the nutter that "church" is a problem. But even though I have issues with "that church", I can still love them, help them and treat them like a human being.

I think where we are getting hung up is on the word church. When I am talking about church, I mean the institution, the building, the tapes and pamphlets, the leadership and the social "sub"-system that exists there. I am not talking about individuals. Even though a church is made of individuals, there collective actions or practices in that place are what's at issue. When we get on the individual level, that is what the church really is.

We may be two christians opposed to each others views and attending different "churches". If you take us out of those "churches" we are still apart of the Body of Christ.

Well, is anyone here prepared to defend Benny Hinn? How about Fred Phelps? David Koresh? Oral Roberts?

All of those guys claim/claimed they are Christians.

The dynamic that I've seen, particularly on Factnet, is that as long as one person gets "saved", it doesn't really matter what these guys do. And I think that dynamic stems from the GGWO idea of Christianity: As an outsider, I see the GGWO version as focusing on asses in seats (numbers), obedience to leadership (no matter how messed up), tithing (to support the machine) and separation from anyone who thinks differently (actually, anyone that thinks). (I know that GGWO has some Children's AIDS crusade, but I never hear about any real charity work. No soup kitchens, no clothing drives, nothing like that. All the GGWO money goes towards growing the machine.)

I think Benny Hinn is full of shit. He doesn't heal anyone, nor does God use him to heal. All he does is collect money and live like a rock star. He can't go for more than five minutes without asking for money. Fred Phelps? It would fulfil a dream of mine to see a Joshua-like "war" take place on Fred and his evil family. I retract my earlier statement about genocide. Kill the whole family and wipe out the poison. Seriously. Oral Roberts claims a "900 foot tall Jesus" appeared to him and told him to ask for millions of dollars. He's lying.

The thing is, many people who call themselves Christians think the same thing, but won't even say, much less do anything about these guys. NOTHING. Why? Because the don't want to cause division in the Body of Christ. So, just like the Catholic church covers up the pedophile priests, Christians indirectly cover up for villains like Benny or make excuses and rationalizations.

It should make a difference in what a person DOES after they get saved!!! This does not mean perfect performance (never sinning at all) but it should involve a noticable reduction in sin in one's life. Salvation is not only the forgiveness of sin, but the cleansing of sin as well. One has to willingly reach out to Christ in faith for both in order to get saved.

I'm also not going to judge who's saved and who isn't either. God knows these peoples' hearts a lot better than Sidethorn does. What I will say is that these guys who manipulate people for money and preach their own man made stuff would do well to examine themselves to see where they really stand with God.

Too many leaders (especially those at GGWO) want to use people, use grace as a liscense to do whatever they want even at the expense of others, and use the avoidance of division in the body of Christ as a means to shut people up and keep the spotlight of accountability off of themselves. People have been fed this stuff about avoiding division in the body so much that way too often they look the other way and keep quiet when they see a pastor or other leader cross the line. Thats exactly what the corrupt leaders want. No wonder they're the same people that preach this shut up and avoid division crap.

Let's speak up and expose the corrupt leaders and wolves in sheeps' clothing among us. Maybe some lives won't get ruined by these sleezeballs that otherwise would be. Unity that requires people getting run over by charlatans that demand people stay silent is a false unity that is not worth having. The same charlatans are actually the ones causing division in the body by pitting people against each other to keep control, demanding that people cover up for them while they exploit people and mislead them, and openly shun anyone who would stand up to them. To get real unity, let these charlatans be exposed and weeded out if they won't repent. Then you won't have so many conflicting teachings and man made kingdoms dividing people up. It sure would go a long way to bring more unity overall, true unity.

Let me state the disclaimer first, so that there is absolutely NO misunderstanding:

What the Catholic Church did to cover up for paedolphile priests is inexcusable; HOWEVER, they have responded in an appropriate and pro-active way. The Archdiocese of Baltimore created the Office of Child and Youth Protection - http://www.archbalt.org/child-youth-protection/

They have implemented a training program that EVERY person who enters a classroom as a volunteer is required to attend EVERY five years. It is called STAND - http://www.archbalt.org/STAND/index.cfm

They require character references and really do check them.

The Catholic Church had a problem. They dealt with it the wrong way. People got hurt. They acknowledged it. They are taking steps to make sure that if it ever does happen again it will not be missed or dismissed. I think it's pretty honorable to own up to what you've done as an institution. I've seen very few institutions own up the way they have.

Does ANYONE think this would have happened in GG?

The only reason the Catholic church did anything was because there was a mountain of documented evidence and a literal army of witnesses who would go forth and testify. Until that happens against GG, GG won't be obligated to do anything.

That is true; however, they had lots and lots of money to throw at the problem and had successfully paid off victims for many, many years. At some point there must have been a moment of clarity and conviction.

If you think that it hasn't cost them scads of money to do the right thing, you are mistaken.

Donations have never been the same since...and remember, the Catholic church merely suggests that people "try to give 5% to the church". We're talking millions.

Then there is the cost of the STAND program. Instructional time, videos, printed materials, labour for verification of reference.

It was no small thing to change the culture.

I also think it's important to note that not once have I heard anyone try to quash conversation about it, bad mouth the victims, or say anything even remotely related to "we'll we SAID we were sorry; can't you just let it go?"

GG had their Sandy Cove meeting, which ended with all participants signing a declaration promising to continue the process. The other documentation they produced admitted many of the wrongs done over many years, as well as problems at that time.

Within a very short time, some of the participants (Franc Corbierre and others) began backing away, distancing themselves from any attempts at reformation.

Soon, Tom Schaller went on the record as saying that while they did have "discussions," no decisions were made. (Of course, this was only after they'd taken FIVE votes for the new pastor, so they could get him in the office!)

Once most of those elders and all the other rabble rousers left gg, it was back to business as usual. And as Daved recently quoted, Schaller's now on record making it very clear -- he'll never give up anything Stevens taught, "what we received 30 years ago, I will never, I will never, I will never, I will never, I will never throw it away." http://z10.invisionfree.com/DiscussGGWO/in...p?showtopic=303

So, will GG ever own up to what they've done, and seek to make amends? Nope. To quote their leader, "Never, never, never, never, never."

Yes, the catholic church through money at the problem and now they are making it right, but it has nothing to do with a moment of clarity or remorse. It has to do with the information age in which we live. You have on demand access to global information with in seconds of it's occurrence. This is something you didn't have 15 years ago and probably didn't become mainstream until about 5-10 years ago. The catholic church is basking in the light of world wide scrutiny. As we have seen with FactNet, putting it out there for ALL to see makes a difference.

And regardless of the reason or motivation for making something right, it will never excuse what has been done. I am all for personal forgivness but the catholic church is a money making machine. It made and maintained it's income during those abusive years by covering up the problems. The only reason they have come clean is they can't preserve their profits by cover-up any longer.

To me it's the same as Bayer. They made TONs of money during the Holocaust. They don't want to be held accountable now because they are a different company with different people. TOO BAD!! That company exists today, because of actions in the past. The catholic church survives today because of actions it has taken in the past. Indulgences, excommunication, no salvation apart from the church, and covering up pedophilia.