Tony Miano: A Case Study in Spiritual Abuse and Bully Behavior

***

Digging a little deeper, analyzing the public words and behavior of Tony Miano. Does his behavior reflect a spiritual abuser and bully?  Is this a man who should be in public ministry open air preaching and evangelizing?

***

 

A reader sent me a link to Tony Miano’s Facebook page cover photo (larger photo).   Miano describes it:

This picture expresses well how I was feeling as I tried to reason with this young man. I pitied his self-imposed and inexcusable ignorance, and I realized I was dealing with yet another child in a man’s body. His “I believe in God-no I don’t” worldview locks him, and self-deluded people like him, into an absurd, alternate reality that he cannot support, defend and, in the end, ultimately doesn’t believe or live by. (Source)

Tony tells us that he tried to reason with this young man.  When reasoning with someone, is this the physical posture that you would take?  Would you position yourself physically over the person, talking down to them? What reasoning is he using and what kind of communication is conveyed with his outstretched arms? Is he looking in this young man’s eyes, connecting with him and his heart, or is he talking down to him with an angry tone and body language?

Take a look at the profile picture (smaller picture). Is this the posture of a kind, loving man who wants to share the life-saving message of the Gospel?  How did Jesus respond to the unsaved? Was he angry? Did he get in their face?

***

Tony Miano:  A Case Study in Spiritual Abuse and Bully Behavior

***

A couple of quotes from the recent broadcast by Tony Miano who interviewed my former pastor, Chuck O’Neal, keep playing in my mind and when that kind of thing happens, I find myself coming to the keyboard to process my thoughts.

Tony’s behavior reminds me the of the same behavior O’Neal used when we were at his church, and brought back a flood of memories upon listening to O’Neal’s voice. Others who have been in high-controlling church situations may be able to connect with some of this and Miano gives us a great case study on spiritual abuse based on his words and behavior.

The following quotes from the broadcast spoke out to me and I would like to break it down. Now, it’s interesting that both of these quotes are Miano’s words, but the behavior is what triggered familiar O’Neal memories for me:

Pastor Chuck and I this week in fact tried to privately encourage a well-known Christian radio personality to end all association with one particular nasty discernment blogger and I don’t know if Pastor Chuck has received any feedback, but I’ve been completely blocked.

This was a person who I considered a friend, but apparently she lacks the discernment to know that the discernment blogger she’s going to for information and encouragement from time to time is not a good one.

It’s important to look at this a little more closely. Miano has been completely blocked? He’s been blocked from calling by phone? by e-mail? from Facebook? from Twitter?  It’s unclear what “block” means exactly, but he considered this person a friend and this friend for some reason felt the need to block him. What kind of behavior would necessitate a person to take a bold action and “block” a friend or former friend? Perhaps badgering?

Another point – why is O’Neal contacting Miano’s friend? Is he also her friend?  Why did both O’Neal and Miano contact this person the same week? Did they conspire to do this together?  This is what triggered for me. When O’Neal had issues with someone and their perceived “wrong beliefs,” he would take his elders in tow in a show of force to convince them how wrong they were until they eventually relented. This is bully behavior.

Can you imagine being this friend and receiving encouragement like this – – having two men contact you out of the clear blue to “end all association” with someone?  When was the last time you had two people tell you who you can associate with?  This is very odd, folks. Also, keep in mind, Miano and O’Neal are not the pastor of this person, they are peers of equal status. Who do they think they are? Telling someone who they can or cannot associate with is not “encouraging,” but controlling. This is a show of force in an attempt to control.

 

Further in the interview, Miano says this:

“I have personally gone to people who seem to be enamored with her and try to explain to them what she’s doing and have been ignored by them, or rebuked, or, uh, basically told don’t ever talk to me again, uh, because I’ve asked them to be more discerning about following this particular discernment blogger. So…she’s one of the worst of the worst. And it is only right since I have first-hand knowledge of her activity, and don’t have to go by hearsay or innuendo, um, it’s only right that we should warn Christians to stay away from her. Uh, to not have anything to do with her, to not read her blog, to not friend her on twitter, don’t follow her on twitter. You are aiding and abetting the enemy.

In this quote he claims he has gone to “people” asking them to be more discerning. What has the response been from “people?”  He has been:

  • ignored by them
  • rebuked by them
  • told to never talk to Tony again

If you “ask” people to be more discerning and they respond by rebuking you, ignoring you, or telling you to never talk to them again, this should cause you to look at yourself and your behavior. He uses the word people which means more than one and if he’s getting the same response from more than one person, he is choosing to ignore their responses and instead shifts the blame to them, refusing to look at himself.  Blame shifting is a common response by abusers who refuse to look at themselves because they deem everyone else to be the problem.

It’s important to note that in this public broadcast in which he promoted heavily in social media, he freely and unashamedly tells us how people responded to him He seems to be unable to see that his own behavior is what illicits these strong reactions.

Again, at the end of the above quote, Miano is telling people what to do (don’t follow her, read her blog, etc). This is not suggesting, this is not counseling, this is commanding and controlling. Bullies command and control. This is unacceptable behavior.

The last sentence, “you are aiding and abetting the enemy” is classic spiritual abuse.  It is essentially saying, ‘God would not want you aiding and abetting the enemy by reading “her” blog.’  Instead of saying, his opinion and offering counsel, he makes it a statement of fact,”you are aiding and abetting the enemy.” He speaks with an authority as if it came from God Himself.  It’s not a suggestion or consideration, but an order to stop aiding and abetting.

He has also put himself in the position of mediator between God and man. If the hearer chooses differently from Miano, he claims they are the aiding the enemy. They can only be right in Miano’s eyes if they go along exactly with Miano’s thinking and opinion (as if Miano is God?!). This is so wrong on many levels. Miano’s words are not God’s words. Miano’s thoughts are not God’s thoughts. Miano’s words are his own interpretation. Again, this is a very common way spiritual abusers use their perceived power to control others into doing what they want.

We have a wide reading audience here. Some don’t like John MacArthur and others have great respect for him. Both Miano and O’Neal attended last year’s Shepherds’ Conference held at Grace Community Church (GCC). Tony Miano is a new member at Grace Community Church and very happy to be under their authority.  He actually mentions Grace Community in this particular broadcast. However, I thought it would be helpful to quote MacArthur’s words because both Miano and O’Neal highly respect this man and this quote clearly shows that Miano has crossed the lines in his behavior and words.

Now this is interesting, too, because Miano is no pastor or elder. He is like you and me. He is not “over” anyone. He is a self-appointed street preacher who says repeatedly that he is under the authority of his local church. Keep in mind, he considered Grace Community to be “over him” when he did his recent broadcast.  I wonder what the leaders of GCC think of that broadcast?

Ok, moving on to the MacArthur quote. A person named Brian asked a question about elder/pastor authority over the flock:

I’m a visitor here and I’m looking to get some biblical and spiritual training and in making a big decision where I might want to go to get this training I feel it’s important to seek good godly counsel, and an elder and a pastor is certainly an appropriate person to go to. My question then is how much liberty does a pastor or elder have in advising us when or where we should go to get this training?

John MacArthur responds:

 

I believe that as far as authority, Brian, the only authority any pastor or elder has is the Word of God. When you step beyond the Word of God you’ve overstepped the bounds of your authority. I have no authority if you’re in my congregation to say to you…Go here and get this training, go there, I command you…I have no authority to do that. That is overstepping my bounds. I am nothing more and nothing less than an instrument by which God makes known to you His revelation. That’s my role.

Now, I may say to you, given the circumstances I would recommend this because it appears from what I know about that and what I know about you that this would be a good choice, but that is not authority that is counsel. My authority stops when I close the page of this book. And then all I’m doing is giving you counsel and you can consider that counsel as to its inherent value and make your own decision, but I have no authority to command you beyond the pages of the Word of God. That very point is where pastors and elders, leadership becomes out of bounds and abusive and overbearing. God never intended that. The best we can do is give wise counsel. That’s why the Old Testament says in much counsel there is wisdom. The point is that if God wanted us to just listen to one guy He would say…If you want to know what to do go ask the elder…but He says get much counsel and you get wisdom. So I believe our authority stops where Scripture ends and then the best we can do is try to give wise counsel based upon our best understanding of the facts. Okay?” Bible Questions and Answers, Part 40

 

 

***

 

105 comments on “Tony Miano: A Case Study in Spiritual Abuse and Bully Behavior

  1. So I was just reading over at worldmag.com the first chapter of a book called Extravagent Grace… I think Tony needs to go read it… Here’s a quote:

    “In the same way, when we witness to unbelievers, we are obeying God. Yet if we are full of pride as we do it, looking down on those who find it difficult to witness and don’t do it, we can be sinning even while we’re obeying. If we think that the person who is rejecting the gospel is doing so because they are less intelligent or morally inferior to us, we are sinning. If we take credit for the new life of faith that only God can give, we are sinning.”

    Like

  2. That is one quote from John Mac that I believe and support. No one except God, in the persons of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, has spiritual authority over any believer! We are not under the ‘covering’ of any human being, but only under God. And it is a heresy and a very severe sin (putting oneself in God’s place) for a human being to claim spiritual authority over another.

    Like

  3. On the surface, JMac’s response sounds innocuous enough, but then I go back and see this:

    “I am nothing more and nothing less than an instrument by which God makes known to you His revelation. That’s my role.”

    In light of the subject matter, the ongoing abuses of people and power resulting in massive cover-ups, not to mention the company he keeps, I have to say, there’s something rotten in the State of Denmark. What is it about their interpretation of God’s revelation that enables and fortifies these bullies (potential abusers)? I’m very uncomfortable with his subtle wording.

    Contrary to his “role”, there’s an App for that, and He dwells within each and every believer:

    “But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.” 1John 2:27

    Like

  4. Ohhh – good catch square1 – – so if John MacArthur is an instrument by which God makes known His revelation – what does that mean? That he’s anointed? Are we, mere pew sitters privy to this revelation or is this revelation given only to pastors? Where does Miano fit in this? He’s not an elder or pastor, I would assume he’s the same as you and me. Wait . . . except that he has a male appendage that I do not possess.

    Ok, now I’m utterly confused. I wish Phil Johnson would come over here and kindly explain this. Why is Phil Johnson not listed on the website’s leader page? http://www.gracechurch.org/about/leadership/

    Ok, here he is. He’s listed at Grace to You: http://www.thegracelifepulpit.com/PhilJohnson.aspx

    Like

  5. JA, Have you ever met someone who is totally obnoxious, cannot see how their behavior puts people off yet goes around boldly blame shifting for their :”cause”? This is Tony. He does not have the ability to see his own behavior. He is a narcissist but NOT a clever one. And that makes all the difference.

    I have worked on projects with these types and am always amazed at how far they can go before folks quietly and over time ditch them.

    One thing I noticed is they take on the issues important to those they want affirmation from. (Whatever it is depending on the environment) And they become sort of the backbencher so to speak. The bold bomb thrower for as long as needed. (In Tony’s case that would be his “boldness” for Christ and position on women)

    And this works for a while but they are often the first ones thrown under the bus, too, when it becomes too embarassing– which it always does at some point.. What saves Tony, most likely, is that is he is not physically around the folks he wants affirmation from,a lot. In an office environment or on a church staff, he would be toast sooner. He has to have you on his side fighting or you are attacked…his thinking is he is carrying the banner. He is a drama queen and addicted to attention as many unclever narcissists are.

    Often guys like this are quietly ignored over time by their idols but are usually the last ones to realize it.

    Like

  6. I think the reason for that, JA, is that Phil Johnson is actually the pastor of an affiliated fellowship which is not technically Grace Church. I think that’s why he doesn’t appear on that page. But you know what’s even more disturbing? I see almost a dozen guys listed and not a single one of them is named Jared. Something’s not right here.

    Like

  7. “I am nothing more and othing less than an instrument by which God makes known to you His revelation. That’s my role.”

    Good catch, square 1. This is nothing but Plato and his teaching concerning the need for “philosopher kings”. Interesing he calls it a “role”. A part he plays? Not what he is.

    And you got it, we all can have “anointing” . I don’t need McArthur for a revelation from God. In fact, it is quite dangerous to believe such things. Can you say, “Jonestown” which is the more drastic end to that sort of thinking. A less drastic example would be how many are not spiritually maturing past what the guy on stage tells them to think and believe. That is the truly sad part of it all.

    Like

  8. “I see almost a dozen guys listed and not a single one of them is named Jared. Something’s not right here”

    LOL!!~! I live at ground zero. Do you have ANY IDEA how many Jared’s I meet in those YRR circles? I would love to see a lisst of them from SBTS.

    Like

  9. I am sensing that what I have been reading on this blog has gone beyond a mundane personality clash, masquerading as a serious dispute about Julie Anne’s and Tony Miano’s different doctrines, about something important, which I might need to study. Nowadays, no effort is made to hide that this is clearly nothing more eternally important than a mere personality clash

    I am sensing that Tony Miano’s personality or style, is what really annoys Julie Anne. That she sees no longer sees any need to dress up the type of annoyance she feels, residing upon the same planet as Tony, as anything more important than a personality clash. To dress it up as something of which believers who have stumbled upon Julie Anne’s blog had best take notice. Believers, that is, who had never heard of Tony Miano, still less of Julie Anne, Tony’s habitual critic, before (for example) Tony (like him or not) had precipitated an important test of British law as touching free speech.

    Like

  10. If it takes me 3-4 times to read a comment and I am still left confused, I will ask for an interpreter. I need an interpreter for John’s comment, please. In the 1st paragraph, I thought John was saying this is more than a personality clash, but something important which he might need to study, but the top sentence in the 2nd paragraph he says what annoys me (ja) is ™’s personality or style. The 2 paragraphs seem contradictory to me.

    If I have no interpreters, John, can you please try it again in simple English?

    To be clear – sure, I am annoyed by ™’s personality and style, but that’s neither here or there. I can get along with a lot of people with weird personalities or styles. That has no eternal significance and in the big scheme of things, who cares? Variety in personalities makes life and relationships interesting.

    What does concern me, however, is that I believe he is causing harm to the Gospel and to the witness of Christ by his words and behavior.

    Like

  11. John Allman admits he “…might need to study.” Too bad he didn’t do that before passing judgment.

    Like

  12. “Nowadays, no effort is made to hide that this is clearly nothing more eternally important than a mere personality clash.”

    That was funny.

    Like

  13. “Nowadays, no effort is made to hide that this is clearly nothing more eternally important than a mere personality clash”

    JA, You are witnessing new propaganda “spin”. Nothing but a personality clash. That is a good one from the bows of screwtape, I gotta admit!

    Like

  14. “Tony (like him or not) had precipitated an important test of British law as touching free speech.”

    Are you not aware of Jay Smith’s very public square impromptu debates with Muslims in Hyde Park?

    Tony epitomizes the “ugly American” in Europe. And not being a “good neighbor” in a foreign land. Let the Scots and Brits test their own free speech. We should have more class when visiting.

    Like

  15. “If it takes me 3-4 times to read a comment and I am still left confused, I will ask for an interpreter. I need an interpreter for John’s comment, please. In the 1st paragraph, I thought John was saying this is more than a personality clash, but something important which he might need to study, but the top sentence in the 2nd paragraph he says what annoys me (ja) is ™’s personality or style. The 2 paragraphs seem contradictory to me. ”

    We used to call this the Dale Carnegie insult sandwich. You are really being belittled but oh so neutrally and nicely. Hee Hee. John could do it better of course. Must not have spent enough time in seeker mega’s to see the pros do it.

    Like

  16. “Well, you at least gotta admire their starch in going against the grain. Cause let’s face it, if you name your son Jared, that’s one less son you can name Braydon, Jayden, or Aidan.”

    Then there are the ever unemployed SBTS student youth pastors named Nehemiah, Obadiah, Zacharias and Abraham. (After Abraham Piper, I suppose? LOL)

    Justin is so passe as they are now in their late 30’s.

    Like

  17. Wow JA – those pictures are perplexing. Like his convo with Elizabeth where he demanded correct greeting from a total stranger, it is disturbing to me that he is not ashamed/embarrassed at what he has become- someone who thinks too highly of himself.

    “Often guys like this are quietly ignored over time by their idols but are usually the last ones to realize it.”

    Like…do they ever come to the realization that although they are tagging their “inner circle” in their tweets, no one is tagging them/replying back?

    Like

  18. Lydia,

    I used to feel intimidated by those kinds of comments which left me shaking my head “what did that even mean.” It made me feel like a less-than, or I was lacking education. Not anymore. We all interpret and understand things differently. But I’ve also learned that sometimes there are motive beyond the words. I don’t know what’s going on here, but I still would like a straight answer from Mr. Allman.

    Like

  19. John, BTW: I double dog dare Tony to test his brand of “free speech” in Saudia Arabia or even Pakistan. Would suggesting he “man up” be a simple personality clash, too? LOL

    Like

  20. I am amazed at how Milano seems totally disinterested in the people he is preachng at. It is one-sided, all about him. Christ reached out to the hurting and disenfranchized right where they were. Milano seems to talk at people instead of coming along side them and encouraging them. Also, if he is so convinced he is under Christ, why does he let a “mere” woman’s blog distract him so much? JA, he does not have to worry about you criticizing him. All he needs to do is open his mouth and he convicts himself. I admire your ministry to those who have suffered at the hands of abusive churches. Keep your focus and don’t let yourself be distracted by this background noise. You are too valuable to your readers and I don’t want you to burn out from this nonsense! O’Neal and Milano won’t last long. Just let them keep talking and hang themselves by their words and deeds. Meanwhile, ignore them and know that you have an important ministry that touches lives in a positive way. You are an amazing woman. Ann

    Like

  21. I suppose John is okay with Miano’s ‘technique’…you know, yelling at sinners, telling them they are bad, they aren’t manly, they need to get jobs; then telling Julie she isn’t saved, she needs to repent. I guess John is okay with Miano taking Christ’s place on the throne and judging others. It’s okay to belittle others, badger them and force men like Cassius to be on camera even after he says he doesn’t want to be – because Miano claims “The world needs to see the faces of men who murder their babies!” As one comment stated on you tube ‘ They should have turned the camera off and wept for this man’s soul. He will never be shamed into heaven. ” Discernment is sorely lacking in our day….Give yourself a pat on the back John, and send your $$ to support this trash – you can google Miano’s blog and find out where to send your check.

    Like

  22. “I used to feel intimidated by those kinds of comments. It made me feel like a less-than, or I was lacking education. Not anymore. ”

    Well, Praise God!

    These sorts of comments are meant to put suggestions into people’s heads and do exactly what you used to feel when reading them. They are meant to be confusing and superior. They WANT you to defend yourself/position but you don’t need to.

    Communicators communicate what they mean and are direct. Even if you disagree with them, you know where they are coming from. I much prefer that even when they are mean but I am also quite familiar with the “mind games” in what passes for Christendom because I lived in that world for far too long. I often think of John Wayne when I see it practiced now. A great line: The only way he could say less is to talk more. (wink)

    Like

  23. “Then there are the ever unemployed SBTS student youth pastors named Nehemiah, Obadiah, Zacharias and Abraham. (After Abraham Piper, I suppose? LOL)”

    My all time favorite was the blogger I saw at Sharper Iron who named his son Hudson-Taylor. I mean, for cryin’ out loud, man — at least take the hyphen and he’ll have some chance in life!

    Like

  24. Ann – no worries. I’m not burning out on Miano or CON. They give me more of an opportunity to identify patterns of abuse that so many of us can see. You’re right, Miano’s words speak for themselves.

    It’s fascinating to break the behaviors/words down carefully and think things through.

    One interesting note about these 2 is they are both proponents of the Doctrines of Grace. So, evidently, according to their beliefs, God has ordained that JA would be a thorn in their side, so it makes me wonder why they are fighting me? Obviously they are not embracing God’s Sovereignty too awful well if they need to retaliate by responding with nasty tweets or CON trying to refer people to his Impostor blog. Time to man up, CON and Miano, and embrace your doctrine. Is God Sovereign or is He not? Hmm, I guess if CON actually believed in the Sovereignty of God, he also wouldn’t have sued us, either.

    Like

  25. “My all time favorite was the blogger I saw at Sharper Iron who named his son Hudson-Taylor. I mean, for cryin’ out loud, man — at least take the hyphen and he’ll have some chance in life!”

    LOL!

    I met one very young David Livingstone and let me tell you, mom said no to referring tol him as David, Dave or Davey. It had to be the whole shebang. So on the playground she is yelling “David Livingstone” come here right now! It was quite the mouthful for the preschool teachers. Met David Livingstone at my daugher’s preschool. Dad was at seminary. Methinks DL is going to have something to say about all this someday. LOL

    The things we saddle our children with!

    Like

  26. Let me please try again, to explain where I’m coming from.

    I don’t know Tony Miano. I don’t know Julie Anne either. Several weeks ago, I watched a video of Tony Miano behaving perfectly lawfully, in a British street, and then a second such video shot at the far end of my country, getting arrested both times,by British cops, for saying what I wish I had the courage to say myself, in my own country. Beforehand I’d never even heard of Tony.

    I set up alerts, so that I got to learn of further developments. Since them, I have received notifications of what I perceive, on a speed-read, to be nothing more worthy of my attention than an aggrieved Julie Anne making ad hominem criticisms of Tony Miano’s personality. If there is something more important on this blog that I need to know about – and I don’t see how there could be at present – then somebody please just tell me. Otherwise, please just act as though I’d never even joined in this discussion.

    Like

  27. “Let me please try again, to explain where I’m coming from”.
    Calling Nanny Jo! Calling Nanny Jo!! He’s out of the naughty seat again. Sheesh!!

    Like

  28. What I have been trying to say (and I admit I have expressed myself clumsily), is that Tony Miano really has somehow ended up the defendant in an important British test case about freedom of speech. As a result, I am notified automatically whenever Julie Anne says (in effect) that she doesn’t like Tony. Shall I just ignore this annoying fact?

    Like

  29. John,

    Ok, John, so he mysteriously ended up in a British test case about freedom of speech. Do you know the background of his trip to Scotland? His open air preacher friend, Pastor Josh Williamson was arrested for the same thing 2 times within 2 wks the previous summer. His case got worldwide media attention. I’ve noticed that Miano likes media attention. He tweeted his own story first thing when he could after his arrest in Wimbledon AND in Scotland. He tweeted and tagged reporters so he could tell HIS story, not His story.

    It’s interesting that when his friend got arrested, he added Scotland to his travel list for evangelism outreach (he lives in CA – is there not enough evangelistic opportunities in SouthernCalifornia?) Why did he need to go to UK when there is so much to be done on our own soil?

    Don’t you find it peculiar that his friend, Josh, got arrested for similar reasons (preaching against homosexuality). It’s obviously a sensitive topic in UK. So, knowing the political climate of that sensitive topic, Miano elected to bring up that topic which is completely unnecessary in sharing the Gospel. He knew what he was getting into. And then the most original thing ever happened. Tony labeled his arrest as Persecution! Come on, Mr. Allman, you’ve got some good brain cells enough to concoct 2 paragraphs that stumped me. Think this through. Look at those videos. Look at his message. You tell me how godly this man is in his behavior and words.

    Like

  30. Please, John, before engaging me in one more comment, please take the time to watch the video that is embedded in my comment above and then talk to me. Let’s get some common ground established here. It’s going to waste my time unless you see this video and assess for yourself. Don’t base everything on the idea of this poor persecuted American soul who was arrested in UK for preaching the gospel. It’s an embarrassment to those who are really persecuted and killed for their faith. Miano is a farce for a full-time evangelist paid by donors $$. Oh, and he’s now begging $$ for a Kindle.

    Like

  31. Let me throw this is fast. “I am nothing more and nothing less than an instrument by which God makes known to you His revelation. That is my role.”

    That is a description of a prophet/apostle. God has already made known His revelation.

    Like

  32. Investigate Miano’s ministry John. He purposely points to homosexuality, then claims persecution. Show us from the Bible where the Gospel centers on homosexual sin. You can speak of Christ, and point to sin without singling out homosexuality. It seems you are only concerned with some battle over freedom of speech. True Christians will likely soon lose many freedoms, but we bear in mind this world is NOT our home.

    Did you view the video Julie Anne provided? Did you read the link? This is a well written post too – http://5ptsalt.com/2014/01/09/why-tony-miano-really-got-arrested-again/

    Like

  33. “Since them, I have received notifications of what I perceive, on a speed-read, to be nothing more worthy of my attention than an aggrieved Julie Anne making ad hominem criticisms of Tony Miano’s personality.”

    So, you are following Tony now and have no problem with his public words against JA in quite a few venues calling her unsaved and contacting people to tell them to stay away from her? Perhaps you either need to do some more indepth slow reading on Tony or we should thank you for letting us know your personality. Not sure which it is.

    Like

  34. “It’s an embarrassment to those who are really persecuted and killed for their faith. ”

    Exactly. I have family who are missionaries in a mostly Muslim country where things are on pins and needles all the time. It makes me furious when some phoney like Tony claims persecution in a secular European nation because they don’t like his “method”. He has no clue. He really needs to man up and go somewhere real dangerous to test “free speech”.

    Like

  35. Good point, Lydia. He attempts to deny people the right to associate with whomever they desire and then cries persecution when he can’t talk about homosexuality in a HOST country that has an established sensitive political climate on the topic.

    Like

  36. Dear Mr. Allman,

    If you really think this is “nothing more than a clash of personalities”, you haven’t been paying attention.

    Yes, Julie Anne has blogged about Miano now and then. But she never picked any fights with him. All she ever did was warn him about his choice of friends (namely, Chuck O’Neal). Since then, I can’t see that he’s ever had a kind (or at least non-condescending) word for JA. Miano has gone out of his way to demean her, insult her, and sit in judgement on her. All in public, and all in the name of Christ.

    Julie Anne has every right to defend herself in this matter, Mr. Allman. And it is more than worthwhile for her to question whether Miano’s treatment of her (or anyone else, for that matter) brings glory to God. TM put himself out there — no one put a knife to his throat, to force him to become a public figure. He has to be prepared for people to call him out.

    I realize that Miano’s case in your country is important to you. And no, this post has nothing to do with that. That doesn’t mean Julie Anne has nothing important to say here.

    Like

  37. Mr. Allman said,

    “Tony Miano really has somehow ended up the defendant in an important British test case about freedom of speech.”

    Somehow? All perfectly orchestrated, I’m sure. Wouldn’t it be a terrible thing if our British cousins lost more freedoms because of him? I wish I could apologize to those humiliated people who were personally confronted by his blaspheming rages.

    Speaking of which, JA, I found this on his FB profile page you cited:

    “How small and weak must a person’s “god” be to think that a 50-year-old sinner on a step-ladder, saved by grace, can undermine and change the eternally predetermined plan the Creator of the Universe has for every person! How small must your “god” be if you think I can push a person away that God has determined to save! Away with your unspoken, yet sinful ideas of the sovereignty of man!”

    …blah, blah, blah…and then this…

    “What does make me angry, however, is when Christians blaspheme God by suggesting there is something I could do–in this finite, dying a little more each day, fleshly shell–that could ever rob God of the glory of snatching a soul from the flames. That makes me angry.”

    So it’s all good. Wow. Then why do we have a New Testament with epistles exhorting us, beseeching us toward godly living, loving our neighbor, etc, etc?

    Like

  38. Lydia said :”Its an embarrassment to those who are really persecuted and killed for their faith. ”Exactly. I have family who are missionaries in a mostly Muslim country where things are on pins and needles all the time. It makes me furious when some phoney like Tony claims persecution in a secular European nation because they don’t like his “method”. He has no clue. He really needs to man up and go somewhere real dangerous to test “free speech”.

    Lydia, I hear you. I was thinking of a relative who served in the Middle East after 9/11. He had his Bible confiscated to avoid “offending” our supposed allies who are Muslim. He was told that it was extremely dangerous to be found in possession of a Bible, and even when you are over there fighting & risking your life & limb, that he would be in danger of being imprisoned if any Muslim saw him reading it.
    I’d like to see Tony try his “preaching” someplace like that. He’d run so fast that it’d make your head spin.

    Like

  39. Zooey, this is a subject that is near and dear to my heart as I have a lot of family and extended family who are now missionaries or who are retired from the field. If there is one thing that makes it very hard for missionaries who have committed to a culture and are there for a long time….it is those who do ‘drive by’ evangelism like Tony. These missionaries are there for the long haul. They are building relationships and meeting people where they are.

    Then some American or youth group comes over and does something similar to what Tony is doing to store up evangelism notches in their belt and the long term missionaries end up cleaning up the mess when they leave. It only makes their work harder. And they are cleaning up such silliness as evangelizing for YEC, patriarchy, homosexuality, etc. They cannot even start with Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, for crying out loud.

    There are some particular well known mission groups who are notorious for this sort of drive-by evangelism in foreign countries. I call it the “mummy and daddy are sending me to see the world” mission trips. I have no problem at all with groups who hook up with established missionaries who go to offer support and help. But who are respectful of their host country and the missionaries who are there for the long haul. In fact, go build houses, paint orphanages, dig wells, do childrens bible school, etc. Be a light. Not a clanging gong.

    Like

  40. “How small and weak must a person’s “god” be to think that a 50-year-old sinner on a step-ladder, saved by grace, can undermine and change the eternally predetermined plan the Creator of the Universe has for every person!” What is he talking about?!? He has NO impact at all, other than rub people the wrong way. I am NOT worried that God can’t save someone Miano has just badgered and belittled; Miano has NOT been called by God to preach. His ministry is a farce, a means he uses to fleece unsuspecting people of $$. We are called to warn against false teachers and expose them {Eph. 5:11}. We need to warn others that Miano’s message is NOT from God. – From the video that featured Cassius, Cassius says “Wait, you said I’m sacrificing my baby? Well, what do you think God did to Jesus?” Like a one-two punch, he follows up with “God took Job’s sons away to see if he’d remain loyal to God.” Tony simply says, “God owes you no explanations. He only owes you his wrath.” If that response doesn’t cause you to want to yank him off his step ladder, check your pulse. Then check your zeal and love for truth.
    This poor, pitiful 50 year old man on a step ladder thinks we feel he is keeping God from saving sinners! He gives himself WAY TOO much credit.

    Now, how is it blaspheming God to suggest Miano is a hindrance? Good grief, Miano and O’Neal really need to invest in a Webster’s dictionary – ‘One who blasphemes; one who speaks of God in impious and irreverent terms’.

    You gotta love his drama, ‘in this finite, dying a little more each day, fleshly shell’. Yea, he’s real humble isn’t he? Too bad we cannot ask Cassius how humble Miano is, and if he thinks Jesus’ message is the same as Miano’s.

    Like

  41. “Ohhh – good catch square1 – – so if John MacArthur is an instrument by which God makes known His revelation – what does that mean? That he’s anointed?”

    Julie Anne, I believe I may have mentioned my grandmother before (like 😉 20 or 30 times),but I have to quote her on this subject:
    My grandparents didn’t have much; they were hard working folks who were doing their best to weather the Great Depression, with my grandfather a semi-invalid. But my grandmother could sew, & crochet, & she could tat. So she made herself one good dress to wear to church on Sunday, & she bought a couple spools of crochet cotton & she made herself some little lace collars to wear on that one dress, just for as little pretty.
    So one day after Sunday evening service, a lady came up to her & said, “The Lord told me to tell you, that you need to repent of your pride & your vanity & throw those lace collars away”.
    Grandma said, “Excuse me, but according to my Bible, when the Lord wants to tell me something, He’ll tell me, not you”!
    I think that maybe a lot of these folks need to read a little of my grandmother’s Bible……

    Like

  42. What a wise, quick-thinking grandmother.

    You and Lydia have such a rich and lovely Christian heritage. I’m humbled by your family members’ amazing commitment to the gospel by placing themselves in true, grave danger. Bless you dear ladies, and your families!

    Like

  43. “You and Lydia have such a rich and lovely Christian heritage. I’m humbled by your family members’ amazing commitment to the gospel by placing themselves in true, grave danger. Bless you dear ladies, and your families!”

    I am most thankful especially for the legacy of strong women who were the steel magnolia types when it came to Christ. But it can also be a problem. Some grow up thinking they “inherited” eternal life. “Yahweh has no grandchildren” as my precious late mother used to tell us. Only sons and daughters.

    Like

  44. Lydia, my father-in-law once mentioned that because his mother was such a godly woman, she had secured salvation for the children as well. My husband just looked at me, like, “what did he just say?!”.

    “Yahweh has no grandchildren.”

    In my last response to you (actually clarification of a previous one) last weekend which you might have missed, I said nearly the exact same thing! 🙂

    Like

  45. @ John Allman. Has it not occured to you that perhaps Julie Anne has some good reasons as to why she has issues with Miano and blogs about him?

    Have you bothered to read any of her previous blog posts about the guy?

    I find it really weird that someone would find a blog about some guy so inconsequential and bother to register to post at that blog just to say “this is all much ado about nothing.”

    If you truly feel that way, why bother to register, sign up, and leave posts?

    Like

  46. Sounds like you are taking the perspective that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, John. Neither you nor Tony Miano like homosexuals so you feel an affinity for him.

    Well the rest of us care about other issues, like exposing spiritual abuse, about women being free and even encouraged to share the gifts that God has given them, about knowing God through Bible study and the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit rather than through mediators, about people knowing that they are saved by God’s grace and not good works and especially not by added on rules that cannot be found in the Bible. Some of us want to be good role models as Christians and want that for our fellow believers as well.

    And caring about those issues, it makes us sad and embarassed to see Tony Miano behave the way he does. He is a self appointed street preacher, which is fine, all of us can share the Gospel. Tony left his job to do this and although he thinks that the role of women that God intended is that of a homemaker and mother, his wife has to work to support the family. That is apparently not enough though because it seems like every month he is asking for a couple thousand dollars in donations to make ends meet.

    If I were to contribute to a street preacher, I would want my money to be used effectively. How many souls are reached when he hops on a plane to Scotland so he can get arrested and tweet about it all day long? Was he glorifying God or seeking publicity?

    And he can’t find a church to ordain him. He doesn’t want to enroll on a seminary and study and prepare for the ministry as the pastors he admires have done. Perhaps if he did he would learn that haranguing, shouting, public shaming, and insisting that Christians who disagree with him are unsaved is no way to bring people to Jesus.

    This is more than a personality conflict.

    Like

  47. Miano went to a foreign country as a guest, acted inappropriately, stirring up trouble. Because his behavior was that of an unwanted guest, he became “wanted”, for possible fines and incarceration. Getting in someone’s face and screaming at them is at least impolite, if not an assault. And filming them while doing it, then publishing the video is a crime in many jurisdiction, unless he first has their permission to film.

    Like

  48. I am presently listening to the recommended two hours of Cross Encounters Radio.

    I watch the film of Cassius. It upset me. I couldn’t help thinking about the film-maker’s inability to post a disclaimer at the end, saying that “No children were harmed during the making of this movie.” As far as I can work out, Cassius’ youngest was alive at the the beginning of the shoot, and was quite probably dead by the end of the shoot. The shock of realising *that*, dwarfed any irritation I felt about Tony Miano’s tone and manner, and the tone and manner of Cassius.

    Like

  49. Ok, I am sufficiently calm to give a response without anger because I think I would have sinned before.

    Mr. Allman – – Why is it you seem to put more value on the unborn child than on the very live human being created by God, Cassius himself? We may never know, but perhaps the baby who died was not the only death.

    What I mean can be best explained by this verse:

    but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

    I am very concerned that Miano’s behavior causes people to run from Christ because who in their right mind would want to have Miano’s Christ? Tony does not represent the Christ I see in the Bible. What if Miano’s own behavior is causing spiritual death – like the millstone verse?

    If you watched the video, you could see clearly that the man had a basic understanding of scripture and even mentioned Old Testament and New Testament and at least one more reference as I recall. Did you see how he grabbed the hand of the woman with the Bible who talked to him so kindly? Did you see how Tony rebuffed her. It looked as if Cassius had ears to hear her. But you see, that was no good for Tony, because she would have been speaking in “authority.” He put a stop to her talking to him. That was clearly not his place to do so. She was not under Tony’s authority. This is complete and utter nonsense. The woman was doing a work for Christ in her behavior and attitude and love she showed Cassius. Cassius responded beautifully to her. As soon as Tony and his harsh words/attitude/behavior entered the picture, there was no room for a decent dialogue. It was Tony’s way or nothing. You see, Tony’s charade is always about Tony.

    There were precious lives to be concerned about in this scenario: the mom, dad, and baby. The baby may have died and that is very sad. However, if Christ is not seen through Tony’s life and responses and all we see is angry words, strife, rudeness, then this really is not about Christ’s ministry at all, but about Tony and his works. God doesn’t want Tony and his works. God wants it to be about Him working through Tony. Tony is a fraud.

    Like

  50. In reply to the longer of Julie Anne’s two recent comments addressed to me, I don’t put “more value” of the unborn child than on his father, Cassius, just equal value. However, the child’s life was in immediately danger. The father was merely in danger of continuing with his complicity in the joint enterprise to end his son or daughter’s life, and all his other sins ultimately pardonable sins.

    As an appropriate thought experiment, ask please yourself: what would the real Jesus have done, if He had behaved consistently with the character he displayed during his earthly ministry, if he had come across a hostage-taker with a sword in his hand, poised to strike dead a toddler? Would that Jesus, in such a life-or-death situation, have said, “Thou shalt not kill. Man, you k-n-o-w you ain’t right!. Please put the sword down now. We can talk about theology after you have put the sword down if you wish, once the little one whose life you are threatening is safe again.”?

    Or would Jesus (as you seem to suppose he would) have put to the back of his mind the immediate peril that the toddler was in, and instead argued with the hostage taker about the finer points of theology, ignoring the peril in which the endangered toddler found himself? Would he have continued to “evangelise” the would-be killer by delivering, in a soft voice, delivering complicated teaching about the relationship between his own Messianic ministry on the one hand, and the law and the prophets on the other, even as he watched the toddler victim being butchered by the hostage-taker he was “evangelising”? I think not!

    This was a life-or-death situation. Jesus found himself in a life-and-death situation himself once, when a woman caught in adultery was brought to him. He did and said what was necessary merely to convict of sin those who wanted to stone her to death (perhaps before his very eyes, there and then), leaving to another day the task of appealing to them to come unto him, weary and heavy-laden, so that he could give them rest, if such a day arrived. He postponed the equally important but less urgent task of leading the woman’s many accusers to the point at which, like the woman whose life he saved with his (you might say) harshness towards the other lost sinners present, they too acknowledged Him as Lord. Jesus let the woman’s accusers walk away from what might have been their only opportunity to hear the gospel from the lips of the Lord himself. But at least he saved the woman’s life, by his (you might say) callousness towards those who wanted her dead.

    I would not necessarily have handled the situation of spiritual warfare shown on the video exactly as Tony did, but I do not think that handling the situation non-confrontationally, as you seem to imagine Jesus might have handled it had he been present in the flesh that day, would have been any more likely than what the annoying Tony did to try at least to accomplish the urgent task at hand, which was surely saving the child’s life before it was too late. Once the child’s life was saved, had Tony succeeded, I imagine we would have witnessed Tony Miano in a much more mellow, non-judgmental frame of mind, and a father, who minutes beforehand had callously and positively stubbornly, planned his own son or daughter’s death, expressing relief and gratitude that he had not gone through with his plans, thanks to Tony’s stern intervention, and asking “What must I do to be saved?” I hope Tony would then have asked the more friendly woman to answer Tony’s question, if that is what the Holy Spirit led him to do.

    Like

  51. I think Marsha and Lyn pretty much summed up Mr. Allman, so I don’t expect to make any headway with him. However, I feel inclined to address some of his points.

    “The father was merely in danger of continuing with his complicity in the joint enterprise to end his son or daughter’s life, and all his other sins ultimately pardonable sins.”

    ??? This makes no sense. Moving on…

    “As an appropriate thought experiment, ask please yourself: what would the real Jesus have done, if He had behaved consistently with the character he displayed during his earthly ministry, if he had come across a hostage-taker with a sword in his hand, poised to strike dead a toddler?”

    About as far away from the callous disrespect which Miano exudes, the closest answer we have in scripture to this “thought experiment” is Solomon’s very cool and reasoned response to the two women claiming to be a baby’s mother. Remember Solomon’s response? Cut the baby in half.

    “…like the woman whose life he saved with his (you might say) harshness towards the other lost sinners present.”

    Harshness? How exactly? I sure wouldn’t say that. He prevented her stoning using 9 mere words, all without insulting them.

    “Jesus let the woman’s accusers walk away from what might have been their only opportunity to hear the gospel from the lips of the Lord himself.”

    Baloney. This brood of vipers was never receptive to Jesus Christ, and I find it really bizarre that you equate the Pharisees with Cassius. Miano is the Pharisee here. Your whole argument is twisted.

    “But at least he saved the woman’s life, by his (you might say) callousness towards those who wanted her dead.”

    Again, NOT.

    “Once the child’s life was saved, had Tony succeeded, I imagine we would have witnessed Tony Miano in a much more mellow, non-judgmental frame of mind.”

    Which leads me to wonder, is there a recorded situation of Miano sharing the gospel with anyone in a “mellow, non-judgmental frame of mind”?

    “I hope Tony would then have asked the more friendly woman to answer Tony’s question, if that is what the Holy Spirit led him to do.”

    Assuming, that is, that the Holy Spirit has been leading him to do anything. I’m sure not seeing any evidence of that.

    As Lyn suggested earlier, “Give yourself a pat on the back John, and send your $$ to support this trash – you can google Miano’s blog and find out where to send your check.”

    Yeah,I hear he’s in the market for a Tablet.

    Like

  52. Mr. Allman,

    Pardon me for saying so, but you seem to keep straying from the main point of this post, in order to talk about your own pet issues. In this light, I can understand Julie Anne’s impatience with you. She’s trying to discuss Miano’s abusive, bullying attitude, and you keep talking about other things. Issues like abortion and free speech are important in their own right, but you have your own blog for talking about them (and I notice you’re not shy about doing so). You might gain more respect and goodwill, sir, if you stick with the topic at hand.

    Even if you think Tony Miano is justified in treating strangers this way at abortion clinics (and I don’t agree that he is), how exactly does that relate to his attitude towards Julie Anne and those who respect and associate with her? What has she done to deserve being vilified and insulted by this man? Why should JA’s supporters be slanged as “aiding and abetting the enemy”? I can’t see any justification for that behaviour, and so I’m much less inclined to give Miano the benefit of the doubt for his other activities.

    Do you think Miano has the right to question Julie Anne’s salvation, or to restrict others from associating with her? If so, please tell us why.

    Like

  53. I’ll let square1 and Serving speak for me as I’ve got to scoot out for a bit. But one thought keeps coming back to me. I wonder what would have happened if the woman who Cassius warmly grabbed her hand might have been able to use her words of grace and truth?

    Miano shut her down. God was working through that woman. Miano decided his ways were better than hers by mere fact that he possesses a penis and she does not. I don’t think Joni Eareckson Tada had a penis when she spoke at the Strange Fire conference telling her story and reading Scripture to a full audience including many men, including Chuck O’Neal, John MacArthur, and Tony Miano.

    I didn’t see Tony Miano jumping up on that stage shutting Joni down. Why not?

    Like

  54. @Marsha

    I am not a friend of Tony Miano’s, for any reason. Why it “sounds like” I am, to you, is for you to explain. I had never heard of him until he got arrested in Croydon. I set up a Google alert with his name, to follow that story. I commented here because, yet again, I’d been notified automatically of a post here dedicated to denouncing him. I wish I hadn’t bothered to join in.

    Tony is pro-life and homophobic, and so am I, but that’s not particularly relevant.

    @Serving Kids in Japan

    I wasn’t trying to stray from the point. Both Marsha and Julie Ann asked me to watch the shocking video starring Cassius on which I commented. Julie Ann had commented on its content herself. The video is about a baby who lost his or her life to the abortion industry whilst the video was being shot. Abortion was the topic of the video, not some irrelevant topic I raised for the first time in this thread, because abortion was (as you put it) a “pet subject” of mine.

    The point I was making was that, faced with a life or death situation, the Lord Jesus Christ chose to talk to those eager to stone an adulteress about their sin, rather than about God’s love. I don’t criticise Him for that.

    If somebody was pointing a gun at my head, I’d be a lot more appreciative of somebody who tried to talk him out of shooting me dead by pointing out that murder attracted God’s wrath, rather than of somebody who reassured my assailant that God was loving, and that even murderers could find forgiveness if they later repented of their sins. Likewise, Cassius son or daughter’s interests were better served by Miano’s stern rebuke of Cassius, urging him to repent before the child wound up dead, than by distracting him with reassurances that, if he continued in his complicity in the killing of his own child, he might yet find forgiveness, one day, so loving is our God. This was an urgent, life or death situation, not an everyday chat on a street corner, for pity’s sake. If Tony’s forthrightness is what somebody finds most offensive about the Cassius video, there is something seriously wrong with the person’s priorities, in my opinion.

    Like

  55. Did Miano’s method work? Which person by observing the video looked to gain Cassius’ ear and respect, Miano or the woman?

    PS I do not believe we know the outcome of that situation.

    Like

  56. John –

    Your example of throwing the first stone is a poor example. Jesus was talking to Pharisees – the religious hypocrites. He was not talking to an unbeliever. This was not the only time he dealt sternly with Pharisees. (I have a good hunch that if Jesus were walking by that abortion clinic with Cassius, he would have likewise chewed out Miano for his behavior.) Jesus never spoke to unbelievers rudely like Tony seems to do on a habitual basis.

    Like

  57. Julie Anne, I do have misgivings about some aspects about the way that this was handled. I think just before one of Miano’s accomplices suggested turning the camera off, Cassius seemed to waver. Perhaps, if the camera had been turned off at that moment, the woman had made her approach then, and Miano had backed off and let the other man work on Cassius with the woman, then Cassius might have plucked up the courage to be escorted back into the abortuary, there to plead with his girlfriend/wife for his son or daughter’s life.

    I may be wrong, but I sense that Tony Miano may not be good a reading signals. When you have kicked the door long and hard, and hear the door being unlocked from the inside, then is the time to switch to knocking gently, or pushing at an already open door.

    I think Cassius was probably frightened of his baby mother. He more or less admitted this. It is a problem that women have more power than men in the family, and never more so than when it comes to decisions to abort unborn children, when the fathers appear to have no rights whatsoever. Cassius tried to explain this. In fact, it was this that seemed to attract the woman’s attention. She offered to accompany Cassius when he went inside to tell Shaquia he had changed his mind. That was why she stepped forward, to close the sale, after Miano had opened the customer using brutal shock tactics. Perhaps if Miano had kept out at that moment, the outcome would have been very different.

    Like

  58. Mr. Allman says,

    “Tony is…homophobic, and so am I, but that’s not particularly relevant.”

    Phobic [fṓbik] –

    1.intensely fearful of something: having or showing an intense fear and dislike of something
    2.relating to phobias: affected with or arising out of a phobia
    3.somebody with phobia: somebody who fears or dislikes something strongly or irrationally.

    Phobia [fṓbee ə ] –

    1.strong fear or dislike: an irrational or very powerful fear and dislike of something such as spiders or confined spaces.

    Not relevant? I beg to differ. God protect society from the likes of you.

    Like

  59. @ square1

    Although this is straying off topic, perhaps I should clarify, for your benefit, what I meant when I described myself as “homophobic” earlier. You responded to my description of myself as “homophobic” by quoting dictionary definitions of certain words different from the word I actually used about myself, the word “homophobic”; namely “phobic” and “phobia”.

    I would like to reassure you that much of the content of the dictionary definitions of the other two, older word that you quoted, does not shed light on what I meant to say about myself, when describing myself as “homophobic”.

    What I meant was that I am homophobic as that word is actually used nowadays in common parlance. The word “homophobic is most often used nowadays as an insult, implying political incorrectness on their part, directed at anybody who has an admitted aversion to homosexuality, as I have. I freely admit to having an aversion to homosexuality, and that I am distressed that the political class have apparently ruled my aversion to be politically incorrect.

    The Oxford English Dictionary defines the word “homophobia” as follows: “An extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people.” But this already out-of-date definition, if the purpose of defining a word is to reflect how that word is most-often used nowadays, rather than how the dictionary-compilers wish the masses would revert to using that word, does not help you much to learn anything about me. I certainly did not intend to admit to any aversion to homosexuality that was either extreme or irrational. I am disturbed whenever I hear the assertion, implicit in the OED short definition of “homophobia”, that there exist “homosexual people”, if the use of this undefined phrase is anything other than an assertion that some of the population have grown rather fond of practising homosexuality.

    The fact is that, for sound, rational reasons that I have hitherto explained patiently, cogently and often, in published web content of mine, I do indeed have what might be called an “aversion” to homosexuality. I also have a disappointment that certain people nowadays choose to describe themselves as “homosexual people”. I find that annoying, because of the suggestion of determinism that is implicit. I don’t believe in so-called “sexual orientation”. (For what it’s worth, sexual orientation isn’t mentioned in the bible.)

    People like me are often insulted nowadays with the nowadays meaning-degraded word “homophobic”, merely because of this characteristic that we share with one another, for whatever reason. Some of us protest at being labelled “homophobic”, merely because we oppose what has been called “the homosexual agenda”. Those who protest often cite dictionary definitions, just as you did, and assert that they do not meet those definitions, so they cannot justly be accused of so-called “homophobia”.

    I choose a different form of resistance. I anticipate the revision of the dictionary definition of homophobia, to reflect current usage. The neologism “homophobia” is nowadays used to denigrate the mindset of anybody who is opposed to homosexuality and the homosexual agenda, as I am, however rational and non-extreme their opposition may be. Instead of arguing semantics, I willingly embrace the label thrust upon people like me, “homophobic”. I demand equal rights for homophobic people.

    You want God to protect society from the likes of me, Square1? How ad hominem of you to say that. But what did you actually know about what I am really like, before penning that curse? Shame on you!

    Like

  60. John, I was very involved in the pro life movement back in the 90’s and we saw lots of babies saved with a very simple but effective method. We opened pregnancy centers as close to the abortion mill as possible. We had state of the art (at the time) 3D ultrasound equip donated and volunteer nurses. In a span of 12 years, a city with 5 very busy mills now has 1.

    There is something about seeing that living being in 3D that made all the difference. Education/love/compassion and resources for young moms who cannot make it are the way to go. Not hate and superiority. Making arrangements for their care before and after baby is huge. We have to put our money where our mouths are if we are serious.

    did we save them all? nope but then probably many more than Tony’s methods.

    BTW: Does anyone know who is filming Tony? Is the filming of this not a clue what this is really all about?

    Like

  61. I think he usually goes out with a team, Lydia. The purpose of this video is intended to provoke us to anger about the man and his response about abortion. Obviously Miano thinks his own behavior is model behavior and an example for all to follow or he wouldn’t be tweeting and advertising it. Wonder why he can’t see what so many pro-lifers see as bad behavior.

    Like

  62. The Muslims probably don’t practice abortion; they have outwardly moral lives. Chuck and Tony are the same as Muslims. They see themselves as morally superior to “sinners”. I submit that were it legal they would kill the mothers and fathers having abortions. Tony IS killing with his words. In the parable of the Prodigal son they are the older brother….angry at the fathers mercy, compassion, love, and forgiveness. Sad.

    Like

  63. Going by your defense of Miano’s tactics, Mr. Allman, and your boasting the term homophobic, I don’t think it was a far stretch for me to conclude that you considered yourself above expressing kindness, compassion or just plain good manners to those who are homosexual. When I was a teenager, my father treated a very good (gay) friend of mine very cruelly. Right or wrong, you reminded me of him.

    You said, “I also have a disappointment that certain people nowadays choose to describe themselves as ‘homosexual people’. I find that annoying, because of the suggestion of determinism that is implicit.

    I happen to agree with you, and am acquainted with a few people who have come out of that lifestyle. In fact, that gay friend I knew in high school is one. I have my doubts that that would have ever come about had a Tony Miano got in his face.

    You want God to protect society from the likes of me, Square1? How ad hominem of you to say that. But what did you actually know about what I am really like, before penning that curse? Shame on you!

    I really hope I have misjudged you in this respect, Mr. Allman. If I have, I apologize.

    Like

  64. How convenient for you to believe that there is no such thing as a sexual orientation, John. Then you don’t have to feel any empathy for people who are attracted to the same sex. I can assure you that there is such a thing as sexual orientation. Mine is heterosexual; I find men attractive. I have no attraction to women. I assume you find women attractive and are not attracted to men.

    There have been young Christian men and women who have unfortunately committed suicide over their same sex attractions. If there is no such thing as sexual orientation, then everyone can just choose to be heterosexual, right? How silly of these young people to feel such anguish!

    There have always been homosexuals throughout human history. Evidence is accumulating as to a genetic connection.

    For the life of me I cannot understand why I should care two hoots if two consenting adults of the same gender want to get married. And I find your aversive inexplicable.

    Like

  65. @lydiasellerofpurple

    “did we save them all? nope but then probably many more than Tony’s methods.”

    Thank you for trying, and, to some considerable measure, succeeding, by all accounts.

    Thinking that one is more important than somebody else is a sin. It is the antithesis of loving (i.e. valuing) one’s neighbour (broadly defined) as oneself. Since I started my life in a womb, over sixty years ago, I grieve that unborn children who are near the beginning of their own lives are being killed daily. I grieve for them because they are my equals. Equality is a secular concept nowadays, but it chimes with bible teaching too.

    I rejoice that you and your colleagues have had the success you have, in saving so many of my unborn neighbours and yours from untimely deaths. I thank you for that.

    I have already expressed doubts about Tony Miano’s methods here, as well as admiration for them, when compared with the complete absence of methods of those who do nothing at all to stop abortion.

    I do see a potential conflict of interests, if that is what you meant to suggest, between producing a video that might go viral on You Tube, and saving a particular unborn child’s life.

    A summary of my opinion is that when a foetus’ life is in immediate jeopardy, almost any tactics are justified. But Tony Miano turned down the apparent opportunity perhaps to save Cassius’ son or daughter from the abortuary, using a nice cop nasty cop psyop on Cassius, whose timely repentance might have saved his son or daughter. Tony had played nasty cop really well until the time came for him to take a back seat. By then, Cassius seemed as though he might have been ready for the female pro-life activist’s intervention, in a nice cop role, thus saving Cassius’ son or daughter. But Tony squelched that woman’s nice cop intervention, and carried on regardless playing bad cop, perhaps because that was the script he had planned for the video he was shooting, and certainly because he enjoyed that nasty cop role too much to please (say) Julie Anne.

    Like

  66. @Marsha

    I ask, rhetorically, whether you have any real life experience of homosexuality yourself. Have you ever participated in a homosexual act? (to my shame, I have.) Do you have any direct experience of homosexuality at all, or is it something you have merely read about?

    Do you know what it is that you are romanticising? Do you know anything about the suicide-inducing “anguish” that you described as “silly”? Have you lost any childhood friends to this “silly” “anguish”? No?

    Well, I have. I venture to say that if you had lived my life, you would not find my “aversion” to homosexuality at all “inexplicable”.

    I have doubts as to whether this is the right place for you to discuss homosexuality with me, or anybody. I question whether you are qualified to have any opinions about homosexuality at all.

    If you are curious to learn, please glance through my blog,

    http://johnallmanuk.wordpress.com

    and then post a message to me at:

    http://johnallmanuk.wordpress.com/readers-comments/

    if you wish.

    Like

  67. John, you are misreading me. Of course their anguish isn’t silly. it is tragic for anyone to be suicidal over same sex attraction. My heart goes out to gay and lesbian youth and the stigma they have to deal with. My point was that sexual orientation is real; if it weren’t people could simply decide they were straight and avoid same sex encounters if they wanted to.

    No, I haven’t had a homosexual experience because I have never been attracted to another woman. I do have gay and lesbian friends and they tell me that their sexual orientation is as fixed as mine.

    I don’t know if I am qualified to discuss homosexuality. I have a BA in psychology and a Ph.D. in sociology. I read research papers. Will that do? What makes you qualified to discuss it, especially since your position that that there is no such thing as sexual orientation is in disagreement with psychologists?

    Like

  68. @Marsha

    Sorry that you thought I had misread you. I did realise that your reference to a certain anguish being “silly” was intended to be ironic. I used the language you used in that ironic statement of yours in order to identify the anguish I mentioned as being the same anguish that you had mentioned earlier. I did not intend to insinuate that you really meant what you wrote when, using irony, you referred to the said anguish being “silly”.

    Do you know of any peer-reviewed research paper that postulates the existence of sexual orientation, as the term is nowadays commonly used? That postulate a two-state (or at most three-state), measurable, objective, innate, immutable, ethically neutral, biological variable that is a property of every human organism? The biological variable that determines the specimen’s (illusory) apparent choices as to his or her sexual behaviour? A paper that then proposes a repeatable experiment the measured results of which that hypothesis predicts? A proposed experiment that could therefore potentially negate the sexual orientation hypothesis, if the predicted results of the experiment were not the same as those actually measured when the experiment was conducted? And which publishes the results of that experiment, showing them to be those predicted by the hypothesis, and to be statistically significant if necessary?

    I really do think that you would be likely to find my blog stimulating. Try, for example, the posting “Buggers CAN be choosers”, if you wish to witness the deterministic assumptions of psychology being questioned.

    Like

  69. Mr. Allman,

    I’ve already asked you twice about Miano’s conduct towards Julie Anne and those of us who support her. So far, you haven’t answered. You have your views about his behaviour towards the strangers he filmed, and I think I understand them (though I disagree with them). What I don’t understand is how that relates to Miano’s abuse of Julie Anne. She has never threatened anyone with death, unborn or otherwise. So what exactly has she — or any of us — done to deserve Miano’s bad attitude?

    I can see that you’ve been fielding comments from a number of regulars here, and on a variety of side topics. I’m sure that you’re busy. But I wish you had addressed this in your last response to me, because I’m very curious about it. And while I can’t speak for Julie Anne, I imagine she would like to know your answer, too. I’d like remind you that she is hostess to all of us on this blog, and what I’m asking is related to the original topic of this post. I think she deserves to hear your answer to this question.

    You say that Miano’s “forthrightness” (as you put it) towards Cassius is warranted by the circumstances. For the sake of argument, let’s say that you’re right. So — do you think that it is right for him to question Julie Anne’s salvation? Or to attempt to get friends and supporters to disassociate from her? If so, what has she done to deserve it? Your thoughts, please, sir.

    Like

  70. @ Serving Kids in Japan

    Reluctantly, I have made the sacrifice of listening to most, if not all, of the 118 minutes 22 seconds of the edition of Cross Encounters Radio, some parts (mentioning Julie Anne) more than once. I don’t know what Julie Anne has done, but I did notice that Tony Miano offered an explanation for his attitude, in terms of things that he alleged that Julie Anne had done.

    During my teens, I received a Collins pocket dictionary of quotations. One of the sayings in it was an old French proverb, of unknown attribution, which I have adopted as a humorous motto of my own: Cet animal est très méchant: Quand on l’attaque, il se défend. (This animal is very wicked. When attacked, it defends itself.) I chose the motto, because it makes me smile. It describes some of the rejection I have experienced.

    Julie’s attitude to Tony’s broadcast reminds me of that old French proverb. If this isn’t Tony’s first broadcast in like vein criticising Julie, then his attitude towards Julie probably exemplifies the attitude lampooned in the French proverb too.

    I wouldn’t have said what Tony said, which went beyond merely questioning Julie Anne’s salvation, which, if that is all he did, might have been fair comment, depending on whether his allegations were true or not.

    I do think that caution is needed whenever one encounters criticism such as I hear from Julie Anne of Tony Miano, and vice versa. I don’t have any need to get to the bottom of this flame war, and to decide whom I believe, and on which side I am on.

    He or she who finds something else to say, apart from warning the public about the other, so important that it causes him or her to abandon attacking the other, will go up in my estimation. On that criterion, Tony is winning the struggle to endear himself with me, but that is not the only criterion.

    Like

  71. “…which went beyond merely questioning Julie Anne’s salvation, which, if that is all he did, might have been fair comment.

    Excuse me as I reel back from the glaring contradiction/double-standard:

    “You want God to protect society from the likes of me, Square1? How ad hominem of you to say that. But what did you actually know about what I am really like, before penning that curse? Shame on you!

    Seriously, am I misreading him? I’d like to know.

    Like

  72. @Brother Allman,

    Well, that was worth waiting for. (/snark)

    I’m reminded of a pithy saying myself: “The only way he could say less would be to talk more.”

    So basically, you don’t care whether any of Miano’s public accusations of a hard-working, faithful homeschooling Christian mother are true. You’ve got more important issues to write about. Gotcha. Though it makes me wonder why you bothered even commenting on this thread in the first place.

    @Julie Anne

    I’m sorry if I dragged that whole thing on too long. Especially since the only “answer” Allman gave us was what he wrote in his initial comment: “It’s all just a meaningless clash of personalities.”

    If you’d like to continue tilting with him, be my guest. Or, no wait, you’re the host, I’m the guest here… well, you know what I mean. I’m off to bed, anyway.

    Like

  73. No worries, Serving. I read through the comment and came away with “what was that?” and decided once is enough. I’d rather give my kid his spelling test 😉

    BTW, someone sent me this open air preacher link. What do you think about this guy? Notice any differences in behavior, tone?

    Nighty-night, Serving. The day has just begun over here – a glorious sunny day, sprinklers are going.

    Like

  74. Mr. Allman,
    After a brief visit to your blog it occurred to me that you make no mention of the Lord Jesus Christ, nothing to indicate that you have been saved and yet you have taken it upon yourself to critique Julie Anne and others concerning their encounters with one Tony Miano who claims to be Christian, but displays little or no fruit to confirm his claim. Your responses here are mostly nothing more than philosophical hog-wash, adding nothing to the conversation, confusing the real issue (that of Miano’s treatment of any and all who would dare to oppose him), and have zero basis in Scripture, which is the final authority of those born again. Instead of clarity you bring mud. Instead of offering a Biblical response and solution to this man’s bad behavior (that done in the name of the Lord Jesus) you attempt to excuse him for reasons unknown. You try to sway people away from the truth by your prowess with words (your not that good at it) and leave them questioning their Biblically founded reasons for the warning sounded about Miano. To muddy the water even further you bring up homosexuality as if to make every body run for the hills in fear that they will say something to displease the LGBTQ crowd.

    The one merit that may be found in your words here is that it is a good exercise in discernment. You bring flattering words and smooth speech for the one being inspected (that would be Miano) and somewhat underhanded and backdoor jabs at the one (Julie Anne) trying to warn her brothers and sisters in Christ of the evils present in what Miano does in the name of Jesus Christ. Why is that, John Allman? Your vain philosophy will never trump the Word of God and since you rely so heavily on you own mind to persuade other, perhaps now would be a good time to suggest that you face your sins head on, confess them to the Lord Jesus Christ and ask Him for His mercy for the salvation of your soul.

    After 57 years of living a self righteous life before God and claiming to be “saved” the Lord found me in the pit of my sins, and granted me grace, mercy, and eternal life. Miano is a man trying to convince others that he is “called of God” to do what he does, but his words and actions are his own judge for they portray a deceitful heart (mostly deceiving Tony Miano) as he tries to prove his spiritual worth first to himself and then for the praise and adulation of others. May God have mercy on his soul.

    Darrel

    Like

  75. @ square1

    I said it “might” have been fair comment for Tony Miano to question Julie Anne’s salvation, not that it *was* fair comment.

    @ Serving Kids in Japan

    “you don’t care whether any of Miano’s public accusations of a hard-working, faithful homeschooling Christian mother are true”

    It’s not that I don’t care. It’s just that I am in no position to work out whether Miano’s accusations are true, apart from those that obviously are true, but of which Julie Anne would be proud rather than ashamed, such as her frequently denouncing Miano. I’m not in any position to find out whether Julie Anne is a hard-working, faithful, homeschooling Christian mother either, though what reason have I to doubt this?

    @ gracealone1 (Darren)

    “you have taken it upon yourself to critique Julie Anne”

    Absolutely not. I offered my impression (as an outsider) of the *dialogue* between Julie Anne and Tony Miano, conducted in the public domain, in which each denounces the other. I know a flame war when I see one.

    “You try to sway people away from the truth”

    No I don’t.

    “You bring … underhanded and backdoor jabs at the one (Julie Anne) trying to warn her brothers and sisters in Christ of the evils present in what Miano does …”

    I have not said anything against Julie Anne, apart from observing that she is stoking up the fires of a flame war between herself and Tony Miano.

    “you bring up homosexuality”

    Somebody else did that, as far as this discussion is concerned.

    It strikes me that you should be addressing your complaints about Tony Miano, to Tony Miano.

    @ Julie Anne

    I regret involving myself in this discussion. I hope I haven’t offended you.

    I cannot make it my business to investigate every example found on the internet of a flame war in which A denounces B, whilst B denounces A, and decide which side I am on. But I do find it regrettable when the agenda of both A and B is that each considers himself or herself holier than the other, and duty-bound to warn the saints about the other, lest the saints be deceived by the object of his or her wrath.

    God be with you.

    Like

  76. John, Love and truth do not need psychops or good cop/bad cop.

    ” But Tony squelched that woman’s nice cop intervention, and carried on regardless playing bad cop, perhaps because that was the script he had planned for the video he was shooting, and certainly because he enjoyed that nasty cop role too much to please (say) Julie Anne.'”

    John, why the dig? You can include me with Julie Ann because we all know this is about pleasing us. (snark)

    Like

  77. John, your perspective comes from following Tony Miano and then coming here. The rest of us got here through our interest in spiritual abuse in the churches and we have a different perspective. Many of the regulars have spent some time in churches where spiritual and sometimes even physical or sexual abuse took place. Others are interested in avoiding such churches or preventing it in our own.

    Julie Anne was a member of a church with a spiritually abusive pastor. She left and said so publicly and was sued by the pastor. He lost the suit. She now writes about why these problems occur in churches, how they can be prevented, and how you can recognize a church in which spiritual abuse is taking place. Her posts present case studies that raise important issues such as how to handle child molestation and domestic violence in the church, the damage that occurs when legalism replaces grace, and how lack of accountability contributes to a host of chronic problems, etc.

    I spent many hours reading this blog before becoming a participant. I could tell that Julie Anne is true to the mission of the site, that there are lovely people here who have found comfort in their journey to healing, and that there is a great desire to know God’s Word.

    As to the abuse case studies that are presented here, I found the information to be accurate. I have read court documents as well as the own words of abusive pastors. For example, when a pastor advocates in court for a child molester and tells the judge that all is well now that he has matched the man up with an unmarried woman in his church, and I read that in a court document available online, well that is all I need to know about that pastor. In many cases, one just has to go the pastor or church’s own website and read articles, see church rules, or watch a pastor’s own sermons to see the problem for one’s self.

    I think Julie Anne is a wonderful person, I am glad that she is here, and I like to think I have discernment.

    Like

  78. Mr. Allman,
    You’ve been given the opportunity to declare your soul’s condition and have declined. That is in itself a negative response, which disqualifies you as a valid participant in any discussion concerning the things of God or His church. Your ignorance of the situation described, the Biblical solution for it, and the likelihood of Miano being a “false brother” (one who claims, but does not possess eternal life) is a major factor that you, by admission, have no knowledge of. Simple, you chose a side as if in a debate team competition and off you went. There are too many lost people meddling in the affairs of God’s people and most of them are church members. I wish you well and especially that you will come to saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    Like

  79. @ gracealone1

    “You’ve been given the opportunity to declare your soul’s condition and have declined.”

    Some of us don’t go in for that when we are online. Nobody else has declared his or her soul’s condition here, as far as I have noticed. I am always willing to give an answer to anybody who asks me the reason for the hope that is within me, though.

    I am no longer “ignorant” of Tony Miano’s warnings against this blog, broadcast a week ago. There is quite a lot else of which I am no longer ignorant too, though some of my new knowledge, of a row dating back many years, of which I knew nothing a week ago, raises new questions I despair of being able to answer to my satisfaction. There are simply years and years of history to this information war on which I have stumbled, in which Julie Anne and somebody called Chuck were pitched against one another, originally. I gather that there has even been a libel action.

    What do you see as the “biblical solution” to an needle match like this?

    I haven’t chosen a side. A venue in which certain content is aired of the overall storm-in-a-teacup or major schism in the bride of Christ, whichever history may judge it to be, has chosen me, namely this blog. But not necessarily for much longer.

    There is an increased risk of false brothers, in a wealthy but unequal society in which half the population of the country are nominal Christians, with evangelical churchmanship, but which elects into government the millionaire members of secret societies, who then spend public money taxed out of the faithful and the not-so-faithful, on bombing foreign civilians, who live in countries against which that country has never declared war. A society that, since Roe v Wade, has butchered more babies than the Canaanites ever did as sacrifices to Molech. A society dominated by elements who foist upon the people the abomination of same sex marriage, and which publishes the most and the vilest pornography of any.

    The search of the disgruntled survivors of perceived or actual spiritual abuse, for authentic organised Christian religion, in such a milieu, presents the saint in search of a church he can bear to attend faithfully with a bewildering set of choices. But at least there are plenty of churches to choose from. There isn’t much need, in the USA, to denounce churches of which one is suspicious, other than for heresy – and there is still plenty of that to denounce – without picking on individuals, because of a dislike of their personalities.

    Like

  80. John, you said: “It strikes me that you should be addressing your complaints about Tony Miano, to Tony Miano”.
    Yean, we ARE talking to Tony. Tony sits home all day twiddling his thumbs while his wife & children work to support him, so that they don’t starve to death while he plans his next Narcissitic Sociopathic Ubermanly Adventure. Oh,& reading other people’s blogs in between appeals for “Money, Money, Money, Money” to buy his new toys.
    Now, personally, I would have stopped buying enough food to feed Tony years ago, & let him live off his fat reserves, but I stop short of calling his family enablers, because its hard living around an abuser. Its hard, & its scary, & maybe its even scarier than I think it is for them. But, hey, that’s me.

    Like

  81. Mr. Allman said,

    “I said it “might” have been fair comment for Tony Miano to question Julie Anne’s salvation, not that it *was* fair comment.”

    Thank you, sir, for condescending to teach me (again) from your high place. Your Clintonian reasoning made all the difference. ::eyeroll::

    Like

  82. I don’t understand why anyone “gets” to question anyone’s salvation. It seems time would be far better served edifying one graciously, not condemningly. Christ came to save the world – he didn’t come to condemn. Shouldn’t He be our example.

    Interestingly – does Miano really act like he’s interested in my salvation. Think about this – – he went on a public broadcast and advertised it numerous times through social media that I am not a Christian (rude judgment call). Does he care if I’m saved? If you care that someone is saved, do you blast about them negatively, or do you reach out to them privately.

    I’m telling you, Mr. Miano is rude, rude, rude. As far as I’m concerned, he needs to send back donation $$ and get a real job. He is no evangelist. He scares people away from Christ.

    Like

  83. Ok…fascinating conversation…learning a ton…don’t want to derail but I need to ask…

    JA-did your pastor’s wife honestly print business cards to complain about you and leave them on people’s cars?!?!

    Did no one in Christian leadership call them out for this?!?!

    There is a piece of me that hopes this is satire…and I’m not getting it…

    JA-I am so sorry…I can not even imagine…your strength amazes me…

    You go girl!

    Like

  84. Maze – Yes, she did. Someone who found the card gave it to Meaghan (another defendant), who showed me (pictured above). Tonya O’Neal bought 5,000 cards (read the fine print under the first picture) and put them in her purse to distribute around the local area.

    I heard back from several people letting me know they had found one on their cars. They also made vehicle magnets and on one blog photo, it was shown on their white Suburban.

    Did no one in Christian leadership call them out for this?!?!
    There’s no church leadership except for the pastor and yes-man elder(s). There is no one over him.

    You can’t make up this kind of crazy.

    Like

  85. Pingback: Tony Miano the Christian Nazi and Religion Itself | Speak Your Mind

Thanks for participating in the SSB community. Please be sure to leave a name/pseudonym (not "Anonymous"). Thx :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s