Beaverton Grace Bible Church, BGBC Google Reviews, BGBC Lawsuit, Chuck O'Neal, Grace Community Church, John MacArthur, Phil Johnson, Spiritual Abuse, Troubling Tweets

Phil Johnson Claims the Main Trouble in Churches are the Sheep, not Wolves

Julie Anne

***

Phil Johnson of Grace Community Church claims that sheep, not wolves are the main trouble with churches

***

Screen Shot 2015-01-13 at 9.06.57 AM
Source

 

***

Yesterday, Phil Johnson of Grace Community Church tweeted this:

 

***

He is assuming the primary problem are the “sheepiness” of sheep???  That does not surprise me. Let me show you my personal experience with three pastors at Grace Community Church. It is my opinion that Grace Community Church’s default mode is:

1) Protect the pastor at all costs

2) Assume the sheep are the cause of your church’s problems.

**

I will share with you my personal experience that led me to come to those conclusions.

A few years ago, in response to my negative Google review, my former pastor said publicly that he had contacted a pastor at Grace Community who gave him the green light to sue me (my wording). I hadn’t received a subpoena yet, but knowing my pastor, I knew that me being sued was a likely possibility.

Here is the screenshot from Pastor Chuck O’Neal’s public lawsuit threat:

Screen Shot 2015-01-13 at 7.32.46 AM

By the way, notice how O’Neal says “under John MacArthur” – – – he meant waaaaaaaay under John MacArthur, but the way he words it, it almost implies the person he spoke with was at the top of the leadership.

So, after seeing that note from O’Neal on Google Review, I contacted Grace Community Church (GCC) and spoke with the volunteer pastor of the day and told him my story of spiritual abuse at BGBC.  My intention was to find out if there was any record of O’Neal calling GCC and a pastor telling him it was okay to sue a former congregant.

This volunteer pastor said that he could see no record of my pastor calling, but couldn’t rule it out, either, saying that he may have had a direct number with another pastor instead of through the number where they log all calls.

This volunteer pastor and I talked for a while. I noticed that he didn’t have anything to say about my pastor’s behavior of threatening to sue me. I was shocked. But what he did do was turn the conversation around to me my sin issues which he was trying to get me to confess. He questioned the state of my family/marriage and clearly did not like that I had posted something publicly about my pastor.

Verdict with Pastor 1:

Pastor = innocent (even when told about lawsuit)

Congregant = automatically guilty even before hearing story

***

Fast forward about a week, I did receive the lawsuit.  Days later, I also received a phone call from Bill Shannon of Grace Community. I had no idea who this man was and he seemed surprised that I didn’t know who he was in the GCC chain of command. He said everyone knows who he is. He actually told me to look him up which seemed a bit arrogant to me, but I did look him up as I spoke with him.

Since this guy was a counselor, surely he would be able to listen to me share my experiences and would have understanding that I was dealing with an abusive pastor. I had heard John MacArthur’s sermons on spiritual wolves. At the time, I was devouring them trying to understand what I had gone through. My experiences lined up with what MacArthur described as a spiritual wolf.

Well, funny thing happened. Bill Shannon nearly duplicated the previous phone call conversation with the volunteer pastor of the day. I also felt like I was a less than – that my story didn’t matter and that my only respectable Biblical place for me was to be using all my time on my family/husband.  He said he was trying to hear my side, but yet he defended my pastor. For the first time in my life, I felt like being a woman was hindering me from having a normal conversation with him. In fact, I told him something like: “I feel that if I handed the phone to my husband, you would give him the time of day.”

But what stumped me about these phone calls is this:  what kind of church leadership defends a pastor who is threatening to sue a former congregant?  Just the fact that a pastor was suing 4 and then later 5 congregants against scripture should scream “abusive pastor.”  We already had the evidence that he was going against scripture on suing Christians.

Verdict with Pastor 2:

Pastor = innocent (even when told about lawsuit).

Congregant = guilty

***

Fast forward a bit and Phil Johnson got involved after The Wartburg Watch blog covered my story.

h

Phil Johnson was on damage control mission trying to do whatever he could do to protect Grace Community Church from getting in the spotlight of encouraging a podunk pastor to sue former congregants.

I heard that Phil Johnson had talked with Dee Parsons of The Wartburg Watch and he shared with her what he knew, but what about me?  I was the stay-at-home homemaker sitting in Eastern Washington with a $500,000 lawsuit and had 10 days to respond to the court. If he found out that Grace Community pastors did not encourage Chuck O’Neal to sue me or even if they did and now were regretting it, wouldn’t a pastoral response (Phil Johnson is first and foremost a pastor) be for him to initiate a call to me? Ask how I am doing? Maybe offer prayer or assistance of some kind?  To reach out to Dee Parsons before reaching out to me personally showed that he was more interested in protecting Grace Community Church’s reputation.

I reached out to Phil Johnson and he called me. He did acknowledge that the lawsuit was wrong. Regarding some of the stories of spiritual abuse, he in general said something like, “if what you say is true about your pastor, then that is wrong.” I felt like he heard me well and even blogged about it in a positive light.

However, the following day, Phil Johnson posted a link to a blog with commentary about pastors suing congregants (referring to my story) on his personal and public Facebook page.  Here is Phil Johnson’s closing comment on that Facebook thread:

***
Phil Johnson - Facebook - May 16, 2012

***

That kind of stung. It seemed as if he was now saying I was now an out-of-control complaint blog.  So I actually questioned him if he was referring to my blog as “online nests of disgruntled, emotion-laden but biblically hollow chronic complaint” and his response to me was that he had never read my blog. Well, alrighty then, I guess it’s just amazingly coincidental how all of this came up: linking to a post about a pastor suing, and talking on the phone with a defendant of a $500,000 defamation lawsuit brought on by a pastor all within 24 hours.

Phil Johnson’s tweet shows what he believes: sheep create most of the church problems, pastors do not, and that is why I believe if you have experienced spiritual abuse and reach out to Grace Community, do not expecting any sympathy from their pastors. Even if you have a $500,000 defamation lawsuit in your hands from a pastor who is going against Scripture to sue you, the questions will go back to you and what sin you brought to the church.

It’s interesting that Johnson said in his Facebook note:

Abusive and heavy-handed, high-control church leadership is a serious problem among some very conservative churches, and those of us who are conservative should speak out against it. If there were fewer control freaks in church leadership, I think there would also be fewer out-of-control complaint blogs.

Aside from attempting to clear Grace Community Church’s name in the case against my pastor, it appears that Grace Community Church has not spoken out against the behavior of my pastor and in fact welcomes him and the men from BGBC with open arms each year at the Shepherds’ Conference (pics from BGBC men at Shepherds’ conference)– the very conference where O’Neal told a former church member that he would go Old Testament on him. Yea, there’s a wolf at the Shepherds’ Conference each year and:  crickets.

Yea, Phil, so go ahead and blame sheep. Bah, Bah

 

 

**

166 thoughts on “Phil Johnson Claims the Main Trouble in Churches are the Sheep, not Wolves”

  1. Well, the quote is (in context) about ecumenism. Is Phil Johnson promoting ecumenism? Didn’t he think anyone would read the paragraph from which the quote was taken?

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Now that I know the context of the quote, I have no idea what Johnson is trying to say. Specifically speaking, what kind of apathy do sheep have? Because if it’s apathy towards uniting with Rome in an ecumenical movement (which Temple thought would be grand and what the article was about) then that’s a major what the heck b/c his boss says the RCC is Satan’s greatest front.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Diane, after Julie Anne copied more of his tweets above, I was going to do a search for the quote to see where Johnson was getting it from, if you had not reproduced it above.

    So, if I am understanding correctly, Johnson is quoting from a pro-ecumenical statement that he would ordinarily disagree with, only to pull out one comment of it (above sheep and wolves), because it serves his sheep-blaming perspective? That is pretty rich.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. If Johnsons means that sheep are apathetic regarding salvation, doing good works, discerning false teachers, the “correct” doctrine, etc., then he needs to find a different quote-preferable one from an article that doesn’t teach the opposite of what Johnson supposedly believes.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. @ Daisy-
    Yes, it’s pretty rich and a bigger problem for me than just tweeting out a silly tweet.
    Is he doing some quote twisting? 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Diane

    Thanks for your detective work and finding that whole article.

    And great question for Phil to answer…

    “Well, the quote is (in context) about ecumenism. Is Phil Johnson promoting ecumenism? Didn’t he think anyone would read the paragraph from which the quote was taken?

    Liked by 1 person

  9. “I learned from these books that some abusive people or bullies only respect people who stand up for themselves.”

    they often look for people who are very fair and/or compassionate. this of course is in the context of a one on one relationship at work, marriage, etc. . when it comes to despotic pastors, they rely on their position, title and insulation. We often affirm their power just by sitting in a pew. Unknowingly, of course. but most people tend to use that as a measure of credibility. People will do this without really knowing them personally. It is the whole cult of personality thing.

    Like

  10. “The sheep are being indoctrinated by guys like Phil Johnson, Mark Driscoll, Perry Noble, and all these other preachers, to be compliant, unquestioning doormats”

    Why wouldn’t a person educated in America not question? That is the bigger question I have. And yes it scares me. I am seeing this in other walks of life. Good little doormats wanting so called experts or tyrants to take care of them and tell them what to think.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. “Well, the quote is (in context) about ecumenism. Is Phil Johnson promoting ecumenism? ”

    Oh Diane good job! This is HILARIOUS. Johnson is one of the 15 heresy hunters (of course he has been about dogma since day one of Pyro) and he is using a quote from the context of ecumenism? I am cracking up!

    Liked by 2 people

  13. lydia00 of JANUARY 14, 2015 @ 10:57 AM

    I think people find it easier to sit under someone in authority. Having to think for one’s self and make decisions all the time can be exhausting, I guess.

    1. Some people want a check list of how to live life (hence the evangelical fondness for giving, getting sermons, or books, with titles like, “15 Steps to Having a Successful Marriage”),

    2. And/or some people want someone, like a preacher, telling them the rules of life, that if they just do “X,” (could be tithe, pray, have faith, whatever) that they will be safe, healthy, and financially secure.

    As to point 2, I see tons of that thinking on Christian TV, especially by the Prosperity Gospel / Word of Faith preachers.

    Also per point 2, this is one reason why people – even by-standers in church or work place or school yard abuse – blame the victim and don’t hold the aggressor accountable.

    It’s less scary to assume the victim must have done something to “deserve” the abuse than to think it could happen to you too.

    Because if everyone faces reality, that any one of us at any time, can be the victim, through no fault of our own, of
    -(pick one these, or make up your own:
    church abuse, spouse abuse, divorce, child molesting, cancer, harassment at the office, car accident, rape, cancer, getting laid off from a job, etc)-,
    then the world become a more scary place.

    People want to think if they are good, follow the rules, serve God faithfully, that nothing can or will go wrong in their lives.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Why should he do anything? In his mind he’s already explained his tweet, blamed it on misconstruing and gave us his point. I don’t think even he knows what his clarification/point tweet means, if he keeps it within the context of the paragraph/article in which the original quote resides.

    “Wolfish doctrines would get nowhere if not for ovine apathy” maybe means (in the context of the initial tweet and article) that wolfish doctrines would fail if not for the sheep’s apathy regarding getting on board with the ecumenical movement.
    lol, I think? 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  20. “Phil Johnson is…also a jerk, in my opinion, who often shows no semblance of the fruits of the spirit in his online communication. Just look at the way he not only criticized Beth Moore, but mocked her looks…”
    ____________________________________

    I dare say Mr. Johnson ought to think long and hard before he criticizes someone’s looks again until he starts mixing in a few more salads and rice cakes in his diet.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Count me among those completely unimpressed with at least my limited knowledge of the fruits of Mr. MacArthur’s ministry. Arguably the most ruthless and unprincipled pastor I have ever had the displeasure of serving alongside (as a member of the elder team) received his Masters at MacArthur’s seminary and formerly served on the staff of GCC. This product of MacArthur’s system very nearly destroyed one church, his actions generating a lawsuit that reached the state’s court of appeals before he finally stepped down in disgrace as part of a settlement and presided over the implosion of another church due to extremely abusive and unethical behavior that included tax and insurance fraud.

    Like

  23. Oh, Diane. He’s going to have to do something. He is going to have to somehow manage to distance himself from the ecumenical angle of this, and especially so since his original point is proven moot by the unsheepish sheep at this blog doing their homework and calling him out legitimately. You, dear lady, very unsheepishly got to the bottom of that quote, found it to be promoting an ideology Johnson is resolutely against (and is in fact one end product of his complaint because ecumenism happens in part because of sheepish sheep), and exposed the matter for all to see. You have shown him to be wrong in at least 2 places. He is going to have to do something.

    I suppose he could try to ignore it. But we don’t really have to allow that.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. “So, if I am understanding correctly, Johnson is quoting from a pro-ecumenical statement that he would ordinarily disagree with, only to pull out one comment of it (above sheep and wolves), because it serves his sheep-blaming perspective? That is pretty rich.”
    ________________________________________

    Should surprise no one familiar with the illegitimate prooftexting methods that the celeb leaders and pastors (in Mr. Johnson’s case, wannabe celeb leaders) utilize to attempt to squelch those functioning as Bereans.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Prediction 2: he will say that he simply posted that phrase to show in fact sheepiness is a word used properly in context, but of course he certainly wasn’t promoting the content behind that quote.

    Like

  28. Your prediction #2 sounds about right, but I agree with your first prediction that he will ignore us. It doesn’t bother me if he does that. I expect it.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. Prediction 3: if i do a blog post that it seems like PJ has started to endorse ecumenticism, he will respond.

    What say you, Phil? Just respond to why you used that quote. We all want to know the truth.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. My money’s on prediction 1, but we can point out the inappropriateness of that.

    The sad thing about Prediction 2 is in spite of the excruciatingly painful and glaringly obvious lameness of it, it would work for a number of his followers. :/

    But let’s at least give him a chance to come up with something creative. 🙂

    Like

  31. “January 14, 2015 @ 2:50 PM
    Count me among those completely unimpressed with at least my limited knowledge of the fruits of Mr. MacArthur’s ministry. Arguably the most ruthless and unprincipled pastor I have ever had the displeasure of serving alongside (as a member of the elder team) received his Masters at MacArthur’s seminary and formerly served on the staff of GCC. This product of MacArthur’s system very nearly destroyed one church, his actions generating a lawsuit that reached the state’s court of appeals before he finally stepped down in disgrace as part of a settlement and presided over the implosion of another church due to extremely abusive and unethical behavior that included tax and insurance fraud. – Truth Detector”

    @Truth Detector,
    Would it be possible for you to post the names of either the plaintiff or the defendant in that case? I would like to look up court of appeals case and post the link to it on here for people to read.

    My former pastor (also in the opinions of many former church members, myself included, is very abusive and unethical), he too is a graduate of MacArthur’s The Master’s Seminary, and he also was on staff at Grace Community Church, and is an aggressive bully. (My former church is Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley in Sunnyvale, CA.)

    I was recently excommunicated and shunned for discovering the pastors/elders good friend at church was a convicted sex offender on Megan’s List and the pastors/elders would not inform all adults or protect children from him. They said he’s “harmless” and coming off Megan’s List. The California Attorney General called that “total lies”.

    Prior to my excommunication and shunning, a godly doctor (married for 40+ years, loving marriage to his wife, loving relationships with his grown children) was excommunicated and shunned for confronting the pastors/elders about Biblical error in how they were running the church.

    Like

  32. “Why should he do anything? In his mind he’s already explained his tweet, blamed it on misconstruing and gave us his point. I don’t think even he knows what his clarification/point tweet means, if he keeps it within the context of the paragraph/article in which the original quote resides. ”

    Totally agree with this. The “great ones” never have to explain anything in depth to the peasants. When the peasants keep asking for clarification they are simply making trouble and will be rebuked. Besides JA is nothing but part of the “Monstrous Regiment of Discernment Divas”

    http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2011/10/first-blast-of-trumpet-against.html

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Alas, Lydia, you remind me of something I forgot. In that thread at PYRO I mentioned above about the Discernment Divas one of Ingrid’s friends came in and tried to appeal on her behalf. In my opinion he was treated abominably even to the point where Johnson blamed him that the conversation about his comment was not allowed to die, because the man kept making earnest appeal.

    Never mind that Johnson himself made the original comment in the first place, and then Johnson himself posted the video clip as an article on his blog, and then Johnson himself said who he was talking about because some of his followers feared he might be talking about them.

    This friend of Ingrid’s really graciously appealed on her behalf to no effect except to be, in my opinion, verbally kicked in teeth while he was with his face, as it were, to the ground at Johnson’s feet asking for her.

    And that friend was a man.

    Diane and Julie Anne are women. (I do have to wonder if Johnson would have behaved differently were Ingrid not a woman.)

    Yeah. Things look grim. 😦

    Liked by 1 person

  34. What do you suppose Phil Johnson’s relationship was/is with his father?

    These “men” that go on these tears against other people, subscribe to patriarchy and all of this “obey” and “submit” stuff, in my experience have always had either: a) non-existent relationships with their fathers (therefore they are grasping at straws as to how to ‘be a man’ and overly compensate via things like patriarchy); or b) had abusive fathers with some kind of addiction in many cases (like alcohol).

    All of the abusive pastors (or those in church leadership) I’ve known and heard about have had horrible relationships with their own fathers.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Micheala, I have watched a few upclose in their trajectory and I can tell you that it is almost always about power. They get it (even in small venues) and it is intoxicating. I could write much about this but it is one reason I so plead with folks not to see them as shepherds. It is not healthy for them. See them as another priest (like you) in the Holy Priesthood. Any believer can “shepherd” for a time. We have all done it whether with our kids, church kids, Sunday school class, friends who need help, etc. We make much too much of a metaphor. We really need to start seeing these guys as equals in the priesthood.

    The rotten fruit that power can bring is quite damaging to everyone involved.

    Liked by 2 people

  36. My Truth Detector, I mean no offense to those who hold to these concepts. But I have read Team Pyro for many years with the hope of coming to peace with their world view. I know this is a rather pathetic and emotional, thus unchristian reason, I loved many in the faith who held to this worldview. Frank Turk, Phil Johnson, and and Dan Phillips. First the positive, Dan Phillips loves his congregation and would die for them, I may not agree with anything the man says but I think this is true. Phil Johnson seems like a good father and husband as does Mr. Turk, as well as Pastor Johnson. That is far bigger in my book than all the tripe they post on team pyro. It is important to point out positives about folks one disagrees with a great deal.

    My bugaboo is the validity of the evidence that supports the Theory of Evolution and the massive, overwhelming totally irrefutable evidence that holds to an “old earth” or a view of cosmology that the universe we reside in is approx 13.5 billion years old. Go search Team Pyro’s archives, another compliment they dont delete articles, and just read. I think they would suggest the same thing.

    I will admit, I cant live in their worldview, the problem I see, is that they cant live in their worldview, because they use computers, which the theories that developed these tools support an old universe “creation.” I could go on and would like to, but my main argument with them is how women, Catholics, Pentecostals, and struggling in the faith are treated. One can also read about that on their site as well. Being pithy is not always the best way to respond to struggling folks. I hope that makes some sense, also I was never impressed with JM, when I saw him on Larry King with Deepak Chopra and Deepak sounds like the most sane in the line up I would be ashamed. But it is held up as a JM standing for the faith, I almost gagged when JM said that DNA is the “proof” against evolution. Double gag. Please dont trust me go look it up.

    Like

  38. Brian,

    I do not share their world view, either, but I do not believe in evolution, even tho I believe in an old earth. Seed is the reason that I do not believe in evolution.

    We see that in all the talk about seed time and harvest, and it isn’t just talking plants.

    Plant a seed (SPIRIT) in dirt (BODY) and Adam became a living soul.

    There is spiritual talk in the Bible that explains the carnal stuff.

    All the talk about “mutation” is outside of creation of seed. Seed begins everything. In the beginning, God created seed, then planted the seed. Seed does not mutate, or evolve into something else. A dog is still a dog no matter what species it is. You cannot mix an elephant seed with a human seed and get an elephant man. So, I do not believe that our ancestors were monkeys, or fish.

    Ed

    Like

  39. Brian, I appreciate what you’re saying.

    My issue with them, really, is the kind of influence they have over others. It seems to me that it is unnatural. By that I do not mean supernatural or of God. I mean the result of violating God’s principles of person hood and the way God wants people to come to conclusions about, well, pretty much anything in life. In short, agreement is gained via a set of manipulative traits, like ability to turn a phrase (clever speech), and craft an argument (words of wisdom), powerful effect on emotions (very much like the Charismatics they so despise). As Lydia said, it is all about power. People who involve themselves with them seem to often be so afraid. Afraid of God. Afraid of these men. Afraid of being out of favor with these men.

    There is so much hostility with these guys. They channel it mostly against heresy and false teaching (as they perceive it), but it is still the demeanor I get from them anywhere they are found. Like that comment thread at PYRO I keep referring to about Ingrid. The ambiance in that thread was so dark and oppressive. Like a dark king holding court. The king is displeased with some woman, we know not who. Fear, fear, tremble, tremble. The maidens tremble, saying “is it I? Is it I? Please say it is not I!” And the friend of Ingrid’s virtually bows down trying pleading for a drop of mercy for her — and finding none, instead gets kicked in the face for his trouble. And the jester (Turk) makes snide comments lest he too find himself on the wrong end of Johnson’s affections. Seriously. That was the feel of the thing to me.

    I have no idea how many of these men are where they are because they were subject to the same treatment (as it were) themselves and it took, and they rose in power, teaching and affecting others as they were taught and affected themselves.

    But they do not seem to be a happy company filled with the joy of the Risen King.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. “Phil Johnson seems like a good father and husband as does Mr. Turk, as well as Pastor Johnson. That is far bigger in my book than all the tripe they post on team pyro. It is important to point out positives about folks one disagrees with a great deal.”

    I am intrigued by this part of your comment. Perhaps you know Phil personally and can attest to his being a good husband? If so, then I acquiesce to your first hand knowledge. But if you are coming to this conclusion because of what he writes, says or how he ACTS in a conference, I would have to think about that. FB, twitter, instagram, getting up on a stage and one’s books can reveal a lot of things, but it sure may not reveal the reality of his personal life.

    I would like to ask Phil why he has a picture (albeit hazy) of what appears to be 3 nude women on his twitter banner? It’s Phil Johnson’s Circus Side Show (perhaps more truth to that than we realize-people do tend to want to tell you who they really are if only we would listen) with the 2nd small banner being that of 3 nude, adult females. I can’t see where there is anything obviously physically wrong with them to deserve being a part of a side show-which makes it even worse. Women, as they are in their normal being, are a side show and Phil liked that banner enough to spread it far and wide across the top of his blog?

    Why would a professing Christian elder think that THAT was an ok thing to have on your very well read (world-famous?) twitter banner? What does that say of his respect for women? I see that and think…wow, would a “good” husband do that…not to mention an elder in a famous professing Christian business/organization (GCC)?

    (btw-I am not too sensitive, I tend to be overly sarcastic and I can take a joke. Just not getting this one.)

    Like

  42. Oh maybe they are all one body…Siamese triplets. I can’t zoom in close enough to really see. Still gross, though.

    Like

  43. What do you suppose Phil Johnson’s relationship was/is with his father?

    These “men” that go on these tears against other people, subscribe to patriarchy and all of this “obey” and “submit” stuff, in my experience have always had either: a) non-existent relationships with their fathers (therefore they are grasping at straws as to how to ‘be a man’ and overly compensate via things like patriarchy); or b) had abusive fathers with some kind of addiction in many cases (like alcohol).

    All of the abusive pastors (or those in church leadership) I’ve known and heard about have had horrible relationships with their own fathers.
    _______________________________________________________

    My experiences exactly. Have no knowledge of any exception to this rule.

    Liked by 1 person

  44. Michaela, if you want to find out some of what happened, at least the public consumption stuff, you can check this citation: 625 S.E.2d 23 (2005), 276 Ga. App. 818

    Like

  45. Diane- “Oh maybe they are all one body…Siamese triplets. I can’t zoom in close enough to really see. Still gross, though.”

    His blog is a freak show. Totally “gross” amen sista!

    Liked by 1 person

  48. “Phil Johnson, ن @Phil_Johnson_

    “Brother, if any man thinks ill of you, do not be angry with him; for you are worse than he thinks you to be” – Spurgeon”

    This reminds me of the “I’m the worst sinner I know” mantra ala CJ Mahaney, whom Johnson and the other two bloggers at the Pyro blog slavishly defended.

    If he means for this Spurgeon quote to apply to his sheep tweet fiasco (and I don’t know if he does because he just threw this Spurgeon quote out there with no reference to himself), then I am glad he is not angry and I will believe him that he is worse than I imagine him to be.

    Like

  49. Oh darn. I was just about to give him credit for an apology and he plays the “I’m worse than you think I am” card, which is from the same deck as the “better than I deserve” card.

    I don’t care how bad he thinks he is or how bad he thinks we think he is or how bad Spurgeon thinks he is. Just own your stuff, apologize for it, and don’t do it again.

    Geesh.

    Of course that still doesn’t answer the use of the ecumenical quote to make his point.

    Liked by 1 person

  50. We did at least get a “sorry” from him of some sort, and one not qualified in fifteen different ways such as to completely eviscerate the original apology and put the onus back on those calling him to task. That puts him at least a few steps up the scale from the standard.

    Like

  53. Yes, I noticed, Diane (which is why I preemptively grabbed a screenshot of it at the top of the post).

    Obviously, he’s been thinking more about sheepishness:

    Like

  55. “January 14, 2015 @ 9:35 PM
    ….I have watched a few upclose in their trajectory and I can tell you that it is almost always about power. They get it (even in small venues) and it is intoxicating. I could write much about this but it is one reason I so plead with folks not to see them as shepherds. It is not healthy for them. See them as another priest (like you) in the Holy Priesthood…. We really need to start seeing these guys as equals in the priesthood. The rotten fruit that power can bring is quite damaging to everyone involved.” Lydia00

    @Lydia,
    Thanks for your post. Yes, I agree about their getting intoxicated by power. Unfortunately between that, the growing movement of patriarchy in evangelical circles, and the resurgence of the shepherding movement (whose founders in Florida apologized and repented for it and its many abuses and un-Biblical treatment), it makes many churches very dangerous places to go.

    Like

  57. We must have touched a nerve. Must be hard to admit the tweet was a total fail from the get go. Some of his word choices are condescending:

    “Phil Johnson, ن ‏@Phil_Johnson_ · 2h2 hours ago
    @Wrenzo60 No, they say it’s cruel of me to say the sheepishness of sheep is more widespread & deadly than the wolves’ wolfishness.”

    That IS a cruel thing to say. Sheep don’t eat wolves…it’s the other way around.

    “Phil Johnson, ن ‏@Phil_Johnson_ · 2h2 hours ago
    @Wrenzo60 It’s a nest of wounded souls who apparently thought I was trying to defend some wolves.”

    Nest? Why use that word? It’s a blog…not a nest. Is that meant as a compliment or a subtle put down? It doesn’t sound very sympathetic to me.

    I thought professing Christian elders were supposed to be the example FOR us to follow? So far, our examples from him include a quote that we were supposed to be mind readers regarding its “real” meaning that he failed to make clear; taking a quote out of its context and using it to mean…well, I don’t know yet what he meant as he never defined church, sheepishness or apathy, but at least we NOW know it’s not a pro-ecumenism quote even though it really is; diverting the blame-we were misconstruing; a sort of apology; a Spurgeon quote about being worse than we could possibly know; some words that seem less than sincere to me and, most importantly, he ditched “the 15” logo!

    Now if he could get rid of the naked women on his twitter banner page that would be a positive example for a professing Christian elder in a mega-church to set…not to mention more God glorifying than leaving it up. Would Jesus have people on view in a side show for other people to stare at? How can side shows be something to even joke about?

    Oh there I go…wringing my hands again.

    Like

  59. It’s a nest of wounded souls
    _________________________
    “Did he call us bitter yet?” Barnabasintraining

    B.I.T. — you read my mind!

    Like

  62. Well done Julie Anne for standing up for what is right. My story hierarchy Presbyterian Church of Australia – innocent. Congregant (ME) guilty. Reason for guilt – FEMALE.

    Like

  63. @WendellG:

    Gee, perhaps we should excommunicate for sneezing in church, or looking the wrong way at the pastor! Why stop there? Why not make everyone have a bar or rfid chip that they have to swipe when they put money in the offering so that they can be exommunicated for not donating enough?

    An RFD chip implanted in the forehead or right hand so that Pastor KNOWS they are his own?

    “And none could buy or sell or worship or tithe except they had the Mark of the Pastor…”

    Like

  65. What do you suppose Tony Miano’s relationship was with his father?

    ___________________________________________

    Truth Detector
    January 15, 2015 @ 10:09 AM

    Michaela’s post:
    “What do you suppose Phil Johnson’s relationship was/is with his father?

    These “men” that go on these tears against other people, subscribe to patriarchy and all of this “obey” and “submit” stuff, in my experience have always had either: a) non-existent relationships with their fathers (therefore they are grasping at straws as to how to ‘be a man’ and overly compensate via things like patriarchy); or b) had abusive fathers with some kind of addiction in many cases (like alcohol).

    All of the abusive pastors (or those in church leadership) I’ve known and heard about have had horrible relationships with their own fathers.
    _______________________________________________________

    My experiences exactly. Have no knowledge of any exception to this rule.


    Liked by 1 person

    Liked by 1 person

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