Can Calvary Chapel Heal The Split?

You may also like...

64 Responses

  1. Alex says:

    Never say never 🙂

    I think the small divide is more about style, emphasis, personality than anything else.

    CCA wants to follow the traditional way CC has been since after the early days where it was more Charismatic and then moved to a more middle-of-the-road conservative Baptist style only more laid back…but still a little bit of Charismatic. Emphasis is basic bible teaching in the traditional Chuck Smith hermeneutic.

    Brodersen and his Camp are more Moody Bible types with a hipster approach and more Theology-focused and Theology-driven than their counterparts and operate outside the Chuck Smith hermeneutic.

  2. Alex says:

    To boil it down to its simplest form:

    The big difference:

    CCA wants to stick to the Chuck Smith way.

    CCGN is going a bit of a different direction.

    That’s about the gist of it. The rest is just drama, noise and much ado about nothing IMO, having learned hard lessons about getting caught up and impassioned about drama, noise and human emotions.

  3. Paige says:

    Having begun in the Spirit, will you now be perfected in the flesh? Gal 3:3 seems applicable.

    We are all flesh and beset with the weaknesses of our flesh, but our Hope has always been in the Lord and His work. It’s His church whether CC or Anglican. Full of sinners. We sin.

    I love Daniel’s optimism (and his preaching/teaching) . When I saw the hashtag #PutOurFamilyBackTogether, my heart rejoiced. As an aging person, I feel like one of my greater battles is with become cynical, focusing on negativity, since I’ve seen so much of it in my life. Being around young, zealous, faith and hope filled Christians brings my focus back to The All Mighty who is able to do exceedingly abundantly beyond all that I could ask or imagine.

  4. Michael says:

    I’ve documented this splits inevitability since before Chuck Smith died.
    I’ve also documented the reasons it happened which have nothing to do with style or doctrine.

    Yes, we all sin, and yes, the Anglican communion has it’s own issues.

    The difference is that we all know about what those issues are and Anglicans vigorously debate them.
    The Anglicans have a bunch of Phoenix Preachers…

    I am talking about a specific group of people with specific intentions that have put a chill on the work of God all over the world.

    While this split looks like a pissing match between tyrants here, the effect on missionaries has been painful and shameful.

    I will keep reporting and keep commenting if for no other reason than to remind people that these hostilities have the worst effects on the most vulnerable working in the kingdom.

  5. Duane Arnold says:

    Nostalgia is a funny thing. It wraps history in a warm, fuzzy glow. It presents a past that never was. All that is to say, perhaps in the next generation, when the old folk have finally given up their positions, the split may be healed… but maybe not.

  6. pstrmike says:

    good assessment Michael. Much of this is about power and greed.

    we tend to remember the past with more fondness than when it was our present experience.

    I started hearing predictions of a split in 2004. It was inevitable.

    Most church organizations began as a split from another organization. If that were not the case, we’d all be either Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox; take your pick.

    I think CGN has the potential to be a healthy church organization that can speak into today’s culture.

  7. Chris Long says:

    Alex @ 2: “CCA wants to stick to the Chuck Smith way.” “CCGN is going a bit of a different direction.”

    The problem with that is one has to ask “the Chuck Smith way of what time period?” Because what I see the CGN doing seems much more like the Chuck Smith and Calvary Chapel of the 70’s to me.

    I see the CGN looking to get back to really being led by the Spirit and not traditions of old, which ironically is EXACTLY what Chuck Smith and early Calvary Chapel were doing back in the day. To me the CGN is more in line with the spirit of Chuck Smith and early Calvary Chapel as it launched and became a worldwide influence. And the CCA, much like many of the other mainline denoms back in the day, seem to be the stodgy old fuddy-duddy’s who are stuck in their traditions.

    And I’m fairly sure the “Chuck Smith way” would NOT have been to create major issues over Brian Brodersen like some in that camp have done. Chuck didn’t do it when he was alive and he handed over the CCCM reigns to Brodersen even against much pressure to do otherwise. So that whole narrative just rings really disingenuous to me.

    But maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about. 🙂 Entirely possible 🙂

  8. Stephen says:

    The split will not heal because the vast majority of the CCA adherents don’t comprehend the real facts behind the split and only hear/believe the “We’re following what Chuck taught us, and the Broderson and his ilk isn’t.”

    The split was not about methodology (never was)…it was about coveteousness and idolatry (which is, according to Paul, coveteousness anyway) at the highest levels of CCA. So I guess the root is nothing but coveteousness propelled through slander.

    So unless the full truth comes out, a public repentance, and a stepping down/off the mighty CCA council…the split won’t be undone.

    You’ll forgive me if I don’t hold my breath.

  9. Corby says:

    No, it can’t, and I’m a little speechless that this person asked this question, based on conversations and statements behind closed doors. But I’m also not surprised.

    I don’t think there will be an organizational healing between CCA and CGN, but I would expect people on both sides to migrate in either direction over time.

    I’m starting to believe that many of the differences are theological, in a sense, but there isn’t a name for it. Perhaps the term “discernment-ology?” It’s not the whole problem, but it’s a very large part.

    “The CCA leadership knew that the affiliates were sensitive to certain buzzwords…”emergent”, “ecumenical”, “Reformed”, etc…and with the help of the “discernment” ministries”

    This mindset is a theological and cultural filter through which many process the world in CC(A). Anything that looks, smells, tastes emergent, ecumenical, and reformed, as they define those things as opposed to what they really are, is those things, therefore to be avoided and considered apostate.

    Add that to the style and “how Chuck did it” elements and a fully picture is created.

  10. Michael says:

    “No, it can’t, and I’m a little speechless that this person asked this question, based on conversations and statements behind closed doors. But I’m also not surprised.”

    I’m not surprised in the least either… 🙂

    He played it well…

  11. Alex says:

    ““The CCA leadership knew that the affiliates were sensitive to certain buzzwords…”emergent”, “ecumenical”, “Reformed”, etc…and with the help of the “discernment” ministries””

    Nope. Haven’t heard one bit of that in CCA and my family runs in those circles. Didn’t hear even one thing like that mentioned at the CCA conference. I don’t know where you guys are getting this from. It’s likely a very small but vocal group but it’s not in the mainstream of the CCA leadership.

  12. Michael says:


    My God, that crap is all over Facebook and the internet.
    Macintosh’s latest comments are about as low as it goes, to say nothing of McClure’s constant garbage.

    I hope they provide ice with your Kool-Aid…

  13. Corby says:

    Alex, I’m getting it from the last few senior pastors conferences I was able to attend, the most recent being 2014. That’s just about all anyone could talk about and there was a visible split, lines being drawn at that conference over those very things. You could tell who was in which camp pretty easily, especially when impromptu, unscheduled workshops were being called to counter the large group meeting that just happened.

    The ministries and individuals that make a large part of their income off of CCs that buy into this is very telling. Just look at speaking line ups at individual church or regional gatherings on these topics. The influence of these things is very present. Maybe less where you are, but very much so in other places.

  14. Alex says:

    “I hope they provide ice with your Kool-Aid…” LOL

    I just haven’t seen it or heard it and I was at the conference, behind the scenes, in the private rooms with the CCA guys and none of that stuff was discussed. I also haven’t heard any of it from by Dad and he is close to Raul and David.

    But even if what you say has some truth to it, that is why there are different Sects, people have different opinions. I know Ms. ODM is sincere and believes there are dangers to the “emergent” stuff and that is her opinion. Others think Reformed Theology is important and correct and that’s their opinion, others think Chuck Smith’s bible teachings are solid Theologically and Doctrinally, others think they are weak. Different strokes for different folks. That’s not sinful or evil, that’s human and why we have 9,000 to 30,00 different flavors of Christianity.

  15. Alex says:

    I think a few guys have your ear and they get you riled up. It happened to me. I know what it’s like.

  16. Alex says:

    Corby, no problem, sounds like you’ve had a different experience in 2014.

  17. Michael says:

    Alex this is a very long story that lots of people on both sides have contributed to. The bottom line is that this happened because of a lust for power and those lusting have used all manner of techniques to get it. So far, they’ve failed, but the game isn’t over.

  18. Alex says:

    One thing I learned about CC or at least CCA first-hand….it is not monolithic. It is very loose. It truly is a bunch of Individuals who are Independent who come together and fellowship. There are no two that are the same. They all don’t agree on everything, but they all agree on some Main Things. The leaders are really put out front by the other guys and decisions are made on the fly and via consensus and oftentimes I saw it as very loosely done, surprisingly loose…which was the opposite of what I had assumed in the past. You have an eclectic group of personalities and just b/c one or two guys says something, it really is not representative of the whole Group b/c of that loose non-authority structure. I’m not commenting on things written or said by any of the CCA guys, just commenting on what I have witnessed is the Dynamic and non-structure.

    I did hear good things said about Brodersen and CCCM. I still do. I’m sure some guys don’t like him, I’m sure he doesn’t like some of the CCA guys. That’s not newsworthy, that’s human.

  19. Alex says:

    OK Michael, that’s just my take and it’s worth about 2 cents. I attended the CCA Conference and it was awesome. I watched some of the CGN Conference and what I saw was great as well. The Gospel was preached at both conferences and the bible prominent in both conferences. Greg Laurie’s Harvest thing was great as well. I hope they all succeed in promoting the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

  20. Kevin H says:

    You obviously have gone through some big changes over the past several months, much for the good. One of those changes has seemingly included a 180 degree turnaround in loyalty to Calvary Chapel, most specifically to the CCA brand.

    You also know Michael more than well enough to know that when he speaks of Calvary Chapel issues that he’s not just haphazardly throwing things out there but that he has much basis for saying what he says and reporting what he reports.

    Being that I attend a CC pastored by one of the foremost leaders of the CCA, I can say without a doubt that there is an emphasis on the things Michael speaks of. We regularly hear warnings of and/or condescension towards those who are emergent or ecumenical or purpose-driven or those who say Israel isn’t important anymore or pastors who drink or pastors who cuss and on and on and on.

    And I have spoken of the following instance once or twice before here, but I will mention it again. Last fall, in the middle of a sermon and pretty much out of context to the text being studied, we heard a strong and sudden condemnation of “those who say that prophecy isn’t important anymore”. While I usually don’t like these types of things, I didn’t give it much further thought after the sermon because that type of thing is par for the course. Then a week or two later Michael reported of the big pressure the CCA was putting on Brodersen, with one of the big items being Brodersen’s recent exhortation at a CC conference to tone back some of the overemphasis on the certain to happen real soon Rapture. I then knew right away what the driver was for the condemnation I had recently heard. Especially since the exact type of scenario has happened before where I would hear a condemnation in church and then soon afterwards I would see Michael reporting on what the latest hot topic in the CCA was. So Brodersen was not mentioned by name from the pulpit in this instance, but at the heart of it was an example of an indirect attack made on him, and an unfair and misrepresented one at that.

    Michael knows what he’s speaking about.

  21. pstrmike says:

    I believed you, advocated for you, and celebrated your restoration with Bob and your mom. However, I don’t think you are as ” in the know” on these things. With your past history, do you really believe these guys, whom you now claim to be an insider with, are actually going to be completely open with you?

    You came to this community when you wanted support, and some here supported you. Now you think you know better than the rest of us on some of these matters?

  22. Descended says:


    Your comment to Alex cuts a little low, imo. Everyone screws up. It doesn’t mean he has nothing to say on the matter. Michael has shown me grace here on the blog, more than I deserve. Maybe show Alex some?

  23. Michael says:

    Alex knows that I know what I’m talking about.
    He’s got a new circle of friends and that’s fine.
    They’re not my friends…and I’ll keep right on doing what I’m doing.

  24. pstrmike says:


    Alex and I have a history of mutual respect, and I don’t think my comment to him is beyond that. Thanks for your concern.

  25. JD says:

    #1 Alex says
    “CCA wants to follow the traditional way CC has been since after the early days where it was more Charismatic and then moved to a more middle-of-the-road conservative Baptist style only more laid back…but still a little bit of Charismatic. Emphasis is basic bible teaching in the traditional Chuck Smith hermeneutic.
    Brodersen and his Camp are more Moody Bible types with a hipster approach and more Theology-focused and Theology-driven than their counterparts and operate outside the Chuck Smith hermeneutic.”

    If that is true, I might have something in common with them; except for the “hipster approach”.and the “Chuck Smith hermeneutic”. I know that I believe in the emphasis on the teaching the word of God. 🙂

  26. JD says:

    Oh, and I am a Moody Alum, but since my hair reaches over my collar I would get kicked out of there today. lol

  27. Alex says:

    I’ve got no problem with Mike’s comment.

    I stated what I’ve seen and heard at the conference and in my interactions with the CCA guys, and as noted, I only saw and heard what I saw and heard.

    But, big deal if a Joe Focht warns against Emergent doctrine. That’s his opinion and there’s some truth to his take, IMO.

  28. Alex says:

    JD, LOL. Hey, Moody is solid IMO. Just noted the heavy Moody influence in BB’s Camp, didn’t dis it.

  29. Stephen says:

    Strange…talking with some who attended the Philly conference informed me that it wasn’t uncommon to be surrounded by a dozen or more guys in a room who were just trashing BB with their slanderous lies….

  30. Alex says:

    Michael, you’re my friend, too. So are the folks on your blog (most of them). I learned some hard lessons about “sources” and I was wrong about CC and the CCA guys and Brodersen’s Camp, all of them. They’re all human and imperfect, but all those guys, in general, love the Lord and are doing what they thing is right….just as you are doing what you think is right (but you are imperfect as well and are wrong sometimes).

  31. Alex says:

    Stephen, if you ever ended up in a situation that cost you something and then compared what people tell you privately or blog anonymously….and then are compelled to tell their story with their names on it in a formal setting that costs them something….you’d learn that people can lie or exaggerate and their stories change or they run for the hills altogether. Don’t believe everything you hear.

    And, if true, big deal. This blog trashes guys it doesn’t like all the time.

  32. Alex says:

    Seems to be a double-standard: “CCA guys shouldn’t say anything unkind about BB!” and then in the next breath: “CCA guys are EVIL and the devil!”

    C’mon guys.

  33. Alex says:

    The article asserts in one breath: “It was all about grasping control of power and assets, not purity of doctrine and practice”

    Then in the next breath goes on to claim in the article and in the comments that the rifts are all about doctrine and practice aka “they bash Brian for the emergent stuff!” etc.

  34. Michael says:

    I don’t have time to engage this today, but I don’t lie about people . The whole anti Brodersen scenario as well as the creation of the CCA itself is based on lies, half truths, and slander.

  35. Alex says:

    “The whole anti Brodersen scenario as well as the creation of the CCA itself is based on lies, half truths, and slander.”

    I disagree. What you call those things is someone else’s perception and they are feeding you information from their perspective and getting you riled up to get their Narrative out in the public, while they can sit back and let you take the risk and the arrows. I think you’re being used and I don’t know what good comes of it if “peace” between the two Groups is the goal.

  36. Alex says:

    But, I love you and always will and I know you mean well and deeply care about these things. Have a good Sunday my friend.

  37. Alex says:

    One last word from experience, if the rift is going to heal, both sides need to swallow their pride and get on their knees before the Lord and forgive the other side and then start over in an attitude of forgiveness and love and reconciliation and not live in past hurts and wrongs.

  38. CostcoCal says:

    Alex, you have shared your opinions. Here is mine. In light of your adventures here on PP, it would do you well to be less adamant about your perspective as though it is the Gospel truth. Be slow(er) to speak and quick(er) to listen. Especially because you have had so much to say in the past.

  39. Alex says:

    I don’t know who you are. I’ll listen to those i know and respect like Mike and Michael who put their names on things. You might as well be a spam bot.

  40. Alex says:

    But God bless you anyway and have a great Sunday 🙂

  41. CostcoCal says:

    You may not know who I am but you do know who the Apostle James is. I quoted him. 🙂

  42. em... again says:

    #37- i challenge anyone to find fault with Alex’s conclusion…
    to borrow from a pastor’s illustration – loosely: the Church are like the passengers on a big intercontinental airliner (God’s plane)… groups and individuals pursuing their own focus, but all will arrive at the same destination…
    (or else get kicked off the plane over open water 🙂 – my thought, not that pastor’s)

    the only dog i have in this fight are a love for the people here and some of my own family who found Christ thru Chuck Smith and are faithful to CC… so forgive this outsider’s observation today

  43. Kevin H says:

    “But, big deal if a Joe Focht warns against Emergent doctrine. That’s his opinion and there’s some truth to his take, IMO.”


    The point wasn’t whether or not it’s a big deal (that can be a separate argument), but rather a confirmation to what Michael said, specifically:

    “The CCA leadership knew that the affiliates were sensitive to certain buzzwords… ”emergent”, “ecumenical”, “Reformed”, etc…and with the help of the “discernment” ministries they fueled a slander campaign against Brodersen replete with these dog whistles calling the assembly to revolt.”

    To which you said, “Nope”.

    Guys like Focht who is a top leader of CCA help set the environment for the affiliates to be sensitive to “emergent” and other such things by regularly warning about/against them. And then I even gave the example of how he slandered Brodersen in not a direct but backhanded fashion. All of it to give direct testimony that I directly see the truths of what Michael reports.

  44. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Kevin H,
    I know this is a personal matter so feel free to not answer. I know that you have personal and family things going on with this but if Focht is the ringleader of what even you consider to be a grave injustice – how do you worship with him each week? I would think you would grab your family and run.

    I say this about Focht knowing only what I read here.

  45. Kevin H says:


    I’ve never used wording conveying a “grave injustice”. I have sometimes spoken to things where I believe he has done wrong, often within the realm of CC politics such as this one. I will usually do this under a scenario when people challenge what Michael reports or says about CC, or more specifically recently, the CCA. I will speak up to support Michael because I many times have directly seen first hand the things he speaks of.

    I have never seen Focht or my CC do things that I consider to be heretical or significantly abusive within the local congregation. And so for consideration of others within my family, I stay.

  46. Bobby Grow says:


    Your comments are kind of strange, you seem to think, or you’re at least presupposing, that you’re the only one in here with any experience or exposure to Calvary Chapel, to the “inner circle voices” etc; and that nobody else has lived in this for years and years. My guess is that most people in here have lots of experience with Calvary Chapel. The split is for exactly the reasons Michael cites. I was at CCCM when Brodersen came there from the U.K., and the grumblings were immediate. It’s all about a power struggle, and the fact that you can’t see that is kind of remarkable. If you’re paying attention at all, and I mean over the long haul on all of this, it’s as simple as pure power struggle and people wanting to keep what they think they’ve had for so long on Smith’s coattails. They see that slipping away a and they largely blame Brian for it all. But they’re wrong and so are you!

  47. Descended says:

    “The CCA leadership knew that the affiliates were sensitive to certain buzzwords… ”emergent”, “ecumenical”, “Reformed”, etc…and with the help of the “discernment…”

    With all due respect to BB and CGN, whom I can agree now may simply be pursuing things in a different fashion than CCA (although I agree with my old CC pastor – who gave him plenty of grace btw – that he seems to be forcing change rather than letting the Spirit do His work),

    BB has gone on record saying he is proudly “ecumenical”, that he doesn’t even know what emergent means – which emergents always say – yet partners with and promotes “da debil ‘imself” Rick Warren of Chrislam fame – has “reformed” speakers on the panel at the latest CGN and, albeit in gentle lullaby tone, bags on “discernment” ministries.

    I’d say he brought much of the trash talk on himself.

    Perhaps his mind changed over the years. Still, if what Bobby Grow said is true and people were seeing and complaining about this almost twenty years ago, then it was either known by Smith that this was the direction BB would go, or BB should not have taken the job in the first place trying to change the course of such a large ship. Unless the Lord is telling him to do it. But I don’t know. All that claptrap that Warren brings to the table is foolishness.

  48. pstrmike says:

    @27 Thanks Alex.

    God’s house is a big, big house which includes all who profess Jesus as LORD (YHWH).

    “I’d say he brought much of the trash talk on himself.”

    What I’ve learned over the years is that trash talk is rarely Kingdom talk.

    Brodersen is doing a good job navigating a transition that is focused on the future rather than the past.

  49. Jeff Rodrigues says:

    As to the divisiveness and friction between CCA leadership and CGN with Brodersen, I do wonder if that friction may have somewhat eased up a bit now compared to when the split happened and when the divisions were brewing beforehand. At the time of the split, Don McClure spoke very strongly to the pastors in my area to distance themselves from Brodersen and CGN. But then months later at the CCA West Coast Conference earlier this year, McClure didn’t come across that way at all when speaking publicly about Brodersen. At this moment, we’ve been very fortunate to have the pastors in my area to not be divided among themselves and to keep ties in both CCA and CGN.

  50. Steve says:


    Its great to hear you comments about ccphilly and Joe Focht. I understand when you have your family there it is difficult to leave. That is a personal decision only you can make. I also agree with your assessment of Focht 100% because I followed him for years. I also agree with MLD, that I would high tail out of this church with some of the comments you made but I know this is easier said than done.

    Focht will be speaking at my ex-church in a couple of weeks that is really quite different than ccphilly and in my estimation at one time probably was going in the direction that Focht warned about often. In fact they still might be going in that direction but I wouldn’t know any more. However, what they both seem to have in common however is being vision casting and pastor centric, power hungry and in my personal opinion extremely arrogant.

    I find this fascinating but also very calculating because I do believe Focht and those of his ilk realize they have a serious credibility problem on their hand with this recent split and Joe Focht’s signature on the slanderous comments on BB. What is becoming troubling is that Focht now only appears to be playing politics with the greater national audience he has now and not sure how much has anything to do with convictions on his part. Only God knows. If what Michael says is true that these dog whistles he has been blowing for years were all an attempt to eventually oust BB and a grab for power and assets, this truly is despicable. I’m not sure I’m that cynical yet but so glad I was ousted a long time ago.

  51. Hangingin says:

    IMHO, CC moved away from things of the Spirit when the Vineyard split occurred. That was far more consequential than most either realize or are willing to admit. Up until that point, the “charismata” without the craziness was relatively common fair in CCs. In one defining moment, that simply got shut down, never to return in even vaguely the same way. If CCA is more charismatic, you could certainly fool me, and I’ve been in it for decades. As one who was at the CGN conference, I felt as though it had a freshness I had not experienced for years. It certainly didn’t feel as though it was a buttoned up academic meeting! Ah, but they had actual teaching that was more than “one more Bible study,” the themes of which have been repeated year after year after year. There is a very real difference among a few of the folks at “the top.” While there are adherents to one side or the other, most of the pastors are still where they were before any “split” occurred, and still wondering “who moved my cheese.” It remains a very good question!

  52. Descended says:


    I think Chuck made the wise decision to split there, my friend. Vineyard went looking for “the stuff” to happen, and the stuff they got was Wimber giving credence to Kansas City Profits , Toronto, Brownsville and Pensacola.

  53. Hangingin says:

    When all that went down, the Vineyard didn’t exist. John was the pastor of CC Yorba Linda. No question he was moving in a different direction in the sense that he was more into things of the Spirit, not at all unlike what happened in the early days of CC with Lonnie Frisbee and others. In the meeting where the split occurred, it was more of a mutual decision than it was a throw-down. No doubt John went way too heavy one way, as did Chuck the other. It’s most unfortunate that split occurred. John needed what Chuck had, and Chuck needed what John had. They brought different strengths to the table. This particular division is not nearly the same as that was, nor are there substantially different ways of doing ministry.

  54. Descended says:

    Well, it existed in spirit, I guess. This split is actually more disheartening, because it shows how bitter we are. Bitterness is poison. Bitterness is anti-what-Christ-says is our greatest gospel,

    “By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”

    So I took my bitter-betty CC “watchman” self to a Penty church, I’m sitting and shutting the Hell up for awhile. A good long while.

  55. Truth Lover says:

    1 Corin 11:19 “for there must be factions (divisions) among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized.” Divisions are not all bad. It’s a part of being discerning and choosing right over wrong.

  56. Truth Lover says:

    Chuck DID NOT need what Wimber had. Wimber went outside of Biblical boundaries and opened himself AND his church up to lying wonders and deceptive so called leaders. He repented at the end of his life. Chuck did need to be open to the real moving of the Spirit though. The early days of CCCM was NOT Biblically sound in all that they did.I was there and remember. They made mistakes and were too overly “charismatic” in the early days, advocating some extremes. But then they corrected themselves as time went on. We could ALL use more genuine experience of the Spirit in our lives. It starts with obedience to the Spirit.

  57. Babylon's Dread says:

    What you are saying about John Wimber is complete ignorance. John was humble enough to repent of many things. He did not repent of the gifts of the Spirit. He brought discipline where he felt there was excess but he did not repent at the end of his life of ‘lying signs and wonders’

    I agree with the post that says bitterness is poison.

    I would contend that both Chuck and John quenched good things in their zeal to cut off excesses. Quenching the Spirit is an ongoing sin of the Judeo-Christian history. Moses saw it, Stephen decried it, and these two men participated in it.

    Most of us do.

    Opinionated Dread

  58. Babylon's Dread says:

    For the record I would rather have Truth Lover thinking of John as repentant and safe than as him damned to hell for his heresy. However, I do not care if TL thinks me apostate.

    It gives me some consolation.

  59. John 20:29 says:

    i think (solely my “thinking,” not preaching it here)… that whenever we take our eyes off of Christ even in zeal for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, we quench the Spirit’s work in our midst…
    i like to think (same caveat ) that the Holy Spirit surprises us when He reveals His move among us and sometimes He is moving most strongly when we are not even aware of His presence…

  60. John 20:29 says:

    jumping into the thread here to opinionate again…

    i would rather focus on Christ than on Truth because, if one is focused on Christ one of the virtues that will certainly develop is a love of and a discernment of truth…
    seems like the harder we focus on trying to be good, the more distracted we become… not saying being good is bad… just that most of us are cross-eyed trying to walk the walk focused on the ditches

  61. Hangingin says:

    It’s easy to be a Monday morning quarterback. In context, John was following the leading of the Spirit in his life. His disciples took things beyond where he would have personally, and John was more of a “we’ll let the Spirit sort it out” kind of guy. Figure it out: he was baptized in the Spirit in CC, actually following his wife’s experience. But to simply judge him as out of control is not only inaccurate but absurd. You really did need to be there!

  62. I have already done this privately, but I wanted to publicly apologize for the beginning part of my comment at #9. I shouldn’t have said that on this public forum. I should have gone to the individual with that kind of concern. I have apologized in private and I’m not posting this to point that out in a boasting way, just to own my crap to those who browse and those who I’ve come to know in this community. Sorry to you for doing that.

  63. Truth Lover says:

    BD, get over yourself! You are coming from a weird place dude. My comments about Wimber repenting were very open ended. I didn’t say what he repented from. I think it was his insistence of healing in the atonement. He taught on how to use the gift of healing and obviously he wasn’t healed himself. I never insinuated he went to hell. But he, although he was a warm fuzzy sort of guy, let a lot of false teaching and unbiblical experiences in the Church. He opened the door to doctrines of demons and it is still invading so much of the extreme charismatic churches. You make me wonder if you attended his church back then and were duped by him.

  64. Danny kluver says:

    All I see is leaders fighting with each other and I am done

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from Phoenix Preacher

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading