No, that just means he decided to come back and the Mars Hill church somehow allowed him to come back. Those are people’s decisions. The deeper question is this: Does Mark’s return fall under the umbrella of God’s will for us to love one another, to work out our understanding of the gospel and to be a witness of relational unity?

I’m coming to realize that the unhealthy church called Mars Hill is vastly more healthy than the ubf community. When is anything at ubf “up to the members”? Only the top echelon gets to make decisions at ubf. It is always up to the General Director and the top leaders. Among the “sheep” no one really knows who the actual members are. Who attends the “annual members meeting”? That was always a mystery. And it was infuriating to find out that after 20 years I was not officially a member of ubf! Only the official members get voting rights. But those votes seem to be a farce because the real power lies in the hands of the Korean chapter directors.

Maybe we should start understanding “our will” and trust that God’s will is for us to love all people, to dig deeper into the gospel and to work out relational unity somehow.

Not too long ago someone asked me “What do you want?” I was shocked because for decades I pretended to know only what God wants. I realized part of my conscience had been eroded away. So now I consider my will and decide what I want, trusting that God’s will simply means “go and learn how to love”.

I now see “my will” in charge of the day by day tasks of living and “God’s will” or Sovereignty as an umbrella purpose of love.

Yes, God knows the “hairs on our head” but I really don’t think this means God is so concerned with our minute-by-minute details (but ubf shepherds often are…)

I was weeping this morning trying to figure out why I had this feeling of loss in my heart. I guess this is what it feels like when you leave a church community after so long. I’ll miss you all. At least in this virtual sense. See you again soon in the flesh!

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Gods-will.html#ixzz3CMeYh87Q

Have any of you read J.I. Packer’s “Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God”?

The “misunderstanding” of God’s sovereignty seems to me to be that when I say that it is God’s sovereignty that God allowed MD (or any other abusive leader) to remain in power, or to refuse to step down, or to establish a mega-church, etc, I am not saying that it is God’s perfect or preferred will, but that He, in his wisdom, perfection, mystery, “predestination,” and sovereignty, allows it to happen. This also does not mean to become passive and fatalistic and to not fight against wrongdoing, evil, and injustice.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Gods-will.html

http://www.gty.org/resources/bible-qna/BQ021513/if-god-desires-all-men-to-be-saved-why-arent-they

http://jkinak04.wordpress.com/2013/11/11/christians-then-believe-that-an-evil-power-has-made-himself-for-the-present-the-prince-of-this-world-c-s-lewis/

It may be more helpful to address something which is practical and concrete, which is God’s moral will. We can say with certainty that Driscoll has violated or failed to live up to the qualifications for an elder as per Titus 1:5-9. If he does not step down then he is guilty of further violating or ignoring God’s moral will or standard as spelled out in those verses or similarly in 1 Peter 5:3; we could even say that he is resisting the Spirit of God in this matter. Also, Chris mentioned God’s code of ethics as seen in Matthew 18. It then becomes obvious that it is much more instructive and practical too look at these situations in that light rather than ascribing them to God’s sovereign will.

But let’s say, for the sake of argument that Driscoll’s refusal to step down is being orchestrated or allowed by God for some unknown purpose. Again, I think that it is helpful to look at some of the facts otherwise we might surmise some kooky things from him “being divinely held in office” as you might put it. (1) The church is not using biblically precribed guidelines to defrock him and (2) as was noted he is biblically disqualified from ministry. So I can only conclude in this situation that God is upholding him similar to how he allowed the disciples to desert Jesus (a violation of God’s moral will, yet he allowed it to happen) or to how in Romans 1 it is revealed that God gives people over to the idols that they worship, which in this case foolish Mar’s Hill congregants are keeping a clearly unfit leader on a pedestal in order to suit their own depraved desires. If anything, I would say that his continued occupancy of the top position in his church is a sign of God’s removal of his mercy and grace from them; he is giving the church over to it’s own folly.

But who knows, maybe I’m going a bit off the deep end. Where is Joe S. with his timely articles to illuminate us theological Neanderthals?

God wants people to repent and return to him. If a church is run by aberrant leaders and is full of aberrant practices, I believe that God would want the church members to take decisive action to get rid of those leaders and practices. If the members fail to do so because of their pride, unrepentant spirit, hardness of heart, etc. then God may allow them to remain as they are. But that is not want he wants.

God, in his sovereignty, created a world in which people are truly free to sin. As a result, many things that happen in this world are not what God wants. I suppose that God decided to do this. God wanted to create a world in which he would not always get what he wanted, at least not in the short run. Because if he always got what he wanted, it would be a world without love.

“So if he comes back, is that not God’s sovereignty??”

I hope the double quotes signal sarcasm ;-)

My answer: No, that would not be God’s sovereignty but a sign that Mars Hill is already too dysfunctional to solve the problem from inside. We are facing a dilemma here: Aberrant and authoritarion leaders can corrupt and brainwash their church members so much that they virtually are unable to act and think appropriately. In a healtyh church, the rank and file should have the power (see Mt 18:15ff) but in an unhealthy authoritarian church, the ordinary members have not been trained to think and make decisions. A similar thing happened in the ICC where at least a part of the church allowed Kip McKean to have a comeback and continue in the same old ways. I fear you will be right with your prediction that some will leave, some will continue to support him no matter what. Maybe others will found a spin-off that tries to keep the good parts while removing the bad parts (like CMI tried to).

I do not believe in being evasive. In my mind, I’m sure that I state my opinions clearly and unambiguously. Maybe some people just do not like it whenever I mention God’s sovereignty, because it seems to be interpreted as putting my hands up and singing “Que sera sera.” Being basically an activist, I’ve never been an advocate of equating God’s sovereignty with fatalism or apathy or resignation.

Also, I have already answered your question in the Mark Driscoll post: “That’s why, Mars Hill friends, I am appealing now to you. Those of you who are true Christians, who understand the Word of God, who love the Lord Jesus, who have kept hoping in vain for change at the top for so long — it’s now your move.” – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/08/08/mark-driscoll-removed-from-acts-29/#comment-14993

So it’s basically up to the 13,000 members of Mars Hill in 15 churches in 5 states to firmly decide and resolve what happens to MD. My thought is that some will likely leave, while some will continue to (blindly) support him, which means that he will quite likely be back, sorry to say.

So if he comes back, is that not God’s sovereignty??

Ben, I know and appreciate that, I don’t disregard it.

You say MD should have stepped down. But the crucial question is: What when he should step down, but refuses to do it? Should the church have the right and duty to force him to step down or dismiss him in that case? What’s your opinion here? Your statements always sound to me as if you want to evade that question.

Another crucial question is whether leaders who have huge outward success (great numbers of members/followers), who seem to be “blessed” and are considered shepherds and authorities “God’s servants”, “God’s speakers”, should such people be judged less strict because of all their success and their spiritual status/nimbus and maybe God is kind of always using/protecting them, or should they be judged stricter because they are shepherds and role models and God wants them to be held accountable? This is an important question where we always clash in discussions because we seem to have different opinions.

“I myself have not experienced the depths of pain that others have experienced, and I’ve finally come to realize that I’m not in a healthy position to help my fellow friends move forward from that pain. My contribution will not lead to healing at this time.”

While your sentiment is commendable and, I believe, comes from a place of genuine love and concern, to always view yourself as one who is obligated to help those who frequent this site to “recover” may not be truly helpful to any of us (including yourself) in the long run. As Chris pointed out, people have been able to recover in spite of and apart from the intervention of UBFers.

If we would seek to help one another here, perhaps the best way is to walk side-by-side and exchange ideas, simply getting to know one another. We will never be able to fully understand each others’ pain, but at least we can dialogue and develop genuine friendships and maybe Jesus will do something with this that far exceeds our vision and expectations. In other words, just lending your honest thoughts and interaction here is actually a significantly helpful contribution in and of itself.

Alright, enough of this formal talk, we gotta see each other in real life and get some Bridgeport coffee or a Pleasant House pot pie; we only live like five blocks apart from each other :)

We are all going to forget what you said about not commenting here anymore. Saying goodbye is a decision and promise you didn’t need to make. If at any moment you want to say something, your comments will be welcome here, even if some of us disagree. And if at any moment, you would rather not say anything, that’s ok too. UBFriends may not appear to be a welcoming place. Sometimes it feels like a mosh pit. But it is actually a friendly mosh pit. the door is always open for people to come in and go out.

Despite the heated-ness of some of the discussions here, I have found that this is actually a safe space. The people who comment here on a regular basis (Ben, Brian, Chris, …) are totally upfront and honest about what they think. They will openly disagree with you if they don’t like what you say. But they won’t stab you from behind. They won’t pretend to treat you nicely but then talk trash about you behind your back to undermine/ruin your relationships with other people.

Maybe one reason for your dissatisfaction can be found in your side remark that you can’t “help your friends move forward from that pain.” I really think you misunderstand what these discussions are all about. We already have moved away from that pain. Most of us have already been healed from the abuse. It’s not we who need to move now, it’s UBF who needs to move to get healed as well. If UBF moves and admits the abuse, repents and apologizes (in that order), then again it will be exUBFers part to move and accept the apology if it’s serious. But unless that happens, don’t expect any exUBFer to move. The ball is now in the court of UBF, it is not in the court of exUBF. The goal of this website in my view is to help UBF make this move, by making them see the problems through open and frank discussions and removing the obstacles that hinder them from moving. And then when UBF starts moving, the other goal or reconciliation will likely be reached as well.

In regard to being a “faithful UBFriends community member”… this is not an organization. We don’t have leaders. This is just a website, with 3 admins and a few readers and contributors.

If you really want a “Christianity Today” type website, you will have to create something besides ubfriends. That is a noble desire and I respect that desire (part of me even wants the same thing!) But honestly, I am just not ready to do that kind of project. It seems none of us are… many of us just don’t have the capacity yet to discuss theology and other issues without the ubf context. That’s understandable. It may take 1 year of recovery for each of my 24 years dedicated to the ubf cause before I can think without the ubf context.

Your apology is accepted, though you didn’t do anything worth apologizing for. You shared your emotions. You expressed your honest thoughts. And that is the kind of dialogue we are seeking here.

Nevertheless, after some thought, I will stand by my original decision. After 4-5 long years of being a faithful UBFriends community member, I think I must finally take my leave.

Yes, as admin, I admit I would introduce filtering, in the same way that I would expect any sort of magazine like Christianity Today or First Things would do in an editorial community that considers its audience. What one person might call “filtering” I would call “editorial discernment.” But perhaps I’m too biased toward my own UBF community be able to serve such a role at this time. And perhaps I’m expecting too much from something like UBFriends. God in his loving sovereignty birthed this site for a reason, and I need to step out of it to allow God reveal to me what He has planned – rather than whining in my own periodic commenting temper-tantrums about how I wish this site was different. And perhaps UBFriends should not be going in the direction as I have so inarticulately communicated and it was wrong of me to impose my dream for it as David W noted.

In any case, I’d like my final involvement in UBFriends to be an Open Letter to My UBFriends and a Proposal for a New Vision Forward For This Site which I presume will be published automatically since heck there really is no filtering, right? (sorry, couldn’t resist there!) In any case, I will wait a couple months to pray and deliberate but I will definitely formalize my farewell with this Open Letter. In the meantime, I will wait for the winds of change, and probably more accurately, the Wind of Holy Change to first occur in my own heart.

I can’t believe I’m finally doing it. A farewell. Geez.

I assure you, there will someday be a John Y “second coming!” Maybe in one month, one year, or 20 years, but I will be back!

For now, I leave you all with my deep gratitude for the times we shared on this site and for the willingness of folks like Chris and Brian K to not dismiss me outright as a “UBF ideologue” (though my comments have been surely irritating and naive at times). You guys have treated me with genuine friendship. I really appreciate it.

Ben, Joe and Sharon know that I deeply care about them, and in many ways I feel like they are my own family members, for I am truly myself when I’m around them. And I know they will not treat my absence from this site as a slight against them. I would never want to hurt them in a million years. Indeed, I confess that everything I’ve done in the past 2-3 years in some sort of public role in this UBF community I confess I was actually doing on behalf of them (long story here!).

Rather, I hope all of you would treat my absence more as a recognition that I’m just not clearly strong enough to participate in a forum like this. I myself have not experienced the depths of pain that others have experienced, and I’ve finally come to realize that I’m not in a healthy position to help my fellow friends move forward from that pain. My contribution will not lead to healing at this time.

Again, it is my love for the original vision of this site that kept me here for so long, and yet now it compels me to take my leave in hope and “necessary sorrow.” But I will be cheering for all of you in my own way toward that collective desire for an outpouring of God’s Love to make its way throughout our community from top to bottom. When that happens, UBF and UBFriends will truly be something to behold! (Lord, make your Bride beautiful with your deep abiding Love!)

I’m deeply grateful to you all. My new home is welcome to any of you if you need a guest room to share with our family and chat about anything under the sun. Until then, farewell my UBFriends!

Correct Ben. But your comments have been perceived to say things you didn’t say. And honestly, I’m confused by your comments, which imply all sorts of things.

The hard lesson I have to keep learning is this: What I say is not what people hear.

Case in point: I wanted to discuss N.T.Wrights’ 2 Corinthians study. I don’t really want to keep talking about ubf. But those articles about 2 Corinthians generated very little discussion (although a really good discussion did in fact break out finally, thanks David and others!)

But my section 2 article generated ZERO comments. If people really don’t want to discuss ubf, then let’s talk about 2 Corinthians.

But the reality is that our community of readership and commenters really really want to discuss ubf topics. So I indulged such desire, and look what happened… many good comments broke out on my message critique article… even JohnY appeared out of the woodwork!

It seems that people find my “Calvinistic” expression of God’s sovereignty confusing, confounding, exasperating, unpleasant and quite unsatisfactory.

If anyone has read what I’ve written they should know that I have NEVER ever said, suggested or insinuated this: “Just pray quietly and accept abusive shaming hurtful horrible church leadership (like Driscoll or others) and let those leaders do whatever c_ap they want, because it is God’s sovereignty that they are leaders.”

Chris, it also seems that you disregard things that affirm you: I’ve already stated repeatedly that I do not and have not ever supported authoritarian abuse, and that Driscoll and a whole bunch of church leaders throughout the ages should have stepped down and let go of their egomaniacal power and control.

You mentioned:

“Those who want him to step down obviously believe that he is doing far more harm than good for Christ and the gospel and the church.” – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/08/31/toledo-ubf-message-just-obey/#comment-15042

For those of us who understand the gospel of grace, the amount of good vs. the amount of bad has nothing to do with it. One fly in the soup renders the soup unfit to eat.

The reason why people keep repeating the same issues is because they want to be relevant, instead of beating about the bush and not seeing the elephant in the room.

From where do you conclude that God “blessed” him (including his methods)? And even if he did, from where do you conclude that is He still “blessing” him? Maybe it’s God who wants to remove him from leadership?

Why do you think it’s ok that he has been a “big stick”, but it’s not ok when his critics are a “big stick” now?

The Bible is clear. If something is clearly and obviously sinful in the church, the church must take measures to ban these sinful things or persons unless they repent. I already quoted several Bible passages that are unmistakable clear about this, and you always just ignore them. Why do you call yourself an Evangelical Christian if you ignore these unequivocal New Testament teachings about the church?

As Brian already said, if you want different content, then just contribute it and do not complain. Alternatively, criticize the content of Brian’s posting, just as Brian criticized the content of the UBF message. Nobody will censor your criticism here. I guess Brian will glad to get feedback and surely heed your advice when it’s good and legitimate.

For instance, Driscoll boasts about his sexual purity, e.g. staying faithful to his wife amidst abundant temptation, never having watched pornography and being a father-like counselor to women who have been sexually abused. But it’s obvious that his pride has caused staggering damage, including the destruction of lives, which seems to be on par with some of the largest scandals among leaders who have given into temptation in the areas of money and sex.

I also wanted to apply this question to our ministry, as you stated. One other question I wanted to ask is what are the guidelines for reinstatement or restoration to ministerial duty (if any such concept exists). I’ve never delved into this aspect of church governance, but I’m beginning to realize how utterly crucial it is to creating and sustaining a healthy and god-honoring congregational body.

Ben, the allegations against Mark Driscoll are serious. But there is plenty of evidence that many ubf leaders, past and present, have done things that are just as bad or worse. Do you think that some of our senior ubf leaders and chapter directors should step down as well? If not, why not?

And for Brian’s part, I can attest that he was trying to steer the discussions away from UBF-related topics. He recently began publishing articles on 2 Corinthians and also one on whether or not we should obey the OT Law (a discussion which you would have thoroughly enjoyed). We engaged in lengthy dialogues about these topics without mentioning UBF, at least to my knowledge. It was very edifying. Somewhere along the way someone else veered back into the UBF lane. My point is that we have a lot of leeway here. You want relevant-esque content and articles, then you should start publishing some.

I am more inclined to believe that God gives us the proper protocol in the Bible as well as the mental, emotional and physical capacity to carry it out rather than ruling us by fiat.

Check out my other comment: http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/08/08/mark-driscoll-removed-from-acts-29/#comment-15030

And I’m not sure that we can use numbers alone as a metric for authentic, gospel-originated fruit within a given ministry. In light of the parable of the wheat and tares, can we be certain that all of the 13,000 congregants are true converts? Certainly, there is abundant testimony of how people’s lives have been changed for the better through MH church. But at the same time, there are many, many testimonies of people who have been turned off to Christianity altogether because of the abuse that they have endured while there.

I will remain friends with all of you and will continue communication on the pressing issues of our community. Everyone here knows that I’m willing to talk and listen – even if I often don’t “get” it. But for now, even if it means irritating my friends, I must follow my conscience and finally take my leave of this online community for now. I’ve maintained my insistence on reading everything on this site out of pure loyalty to my friends. For now, I think to be a true friend is to no longer enable habits and patterns of thinking/communicating that I think is actually harming friendships in the long-term and inhibiting genuine healing and reconciliation for the community.

My offer to be on admin team still stands. If I’m allowed to work with a balanced team of contributors to move this site back to how I perceive was its original purpose of Christian unity, then I will return as an active contributor. For now, I will take my “adieu.”

No doubt I will make my return. :)

For instance, the public outcry is for Mark Driscoll to step down, even from among his own rank, a few current Mars Hill pastors. But hardly anyone believes or thinks that he will step down willingly or voluntarily. Why the heck wouldn’t God just forcibly remove him by some supernatural means?

Those who want him to step down obviously believe that he is doing far more harm than good for Christ and the gospel and the church.

But might not God be allowing him to remain as the head honcho because God still has his own purposes for him being the big stick that he is?

Since Mars Hill began in 1995 God has obviously allowed him to thrive and grow from a small house church, perhaps only a little bigger than most UBF house churches, to 15 churches in 5 states boasting 13,000 members. Why would God “bless” him in such a way that would only make many mouths in ubf water (probably including mine!)?

You are correct, this is not my website. It is a community website. I am a gatekeeper of sorts though.

You mention that if you become an Admin, “Then you won’t see me as a drive-by commenter any longer. I will be a full-fledged contributor.” – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/08/31/toledo-ubf-message-just-obey/#comment-15023

Why can you only comment if you have some Admin authority? This makes me leery of including you in the Admins group. If you want to change the tone here, submit articles and comments. That is the only this we can do. I’m all for non-ubf discussions. I tried that (see my last articles prior to the message criticism). But what happened? Other people pulled the conversation back to ubf…

The Admins group here at ubfriends, myself include, have chosen NOT to use our Admin privileges except for stepping in a few times since 2010. We do NOT filter comments or articles. We have published every article except for 1 which contained some personal references that the author then decided not to publish after our questions.

I do not feel entitled to “full control of this website”. I have backed away several times. Did any else step up?

Well yes, Ben stepped up. We have 483 articles published. 182 were from Ben. I submitted 101 articles. Yes I have most comments but when I back off, the site goes silent.

How many did you publish? The answer is 2. I will never be silent about the abuses I see at UBF, but I will certainly publish any article submitted with no filtering. Forests has an article in the queue that I will publish soon.

And if we want to speak in terms of entitlement, then I should say that I am entitled to have some say here. I was one of the original founders (where’s my Founders day? :) and I pay monthly to keep this site hosted. I own the domain and I accept the responsibility if someone at UBF decides to take up the lawsuit approach again to silencing their critics. And that responsibility I will gladly bear.

Then you won’t see me as a drive-by commenter any longer. I will be a full-fledged contributor.

It needs an important clarification, though, since you recommend “not too zealously remove the evil that God allows to coexist with the evil in the world.” The emphasis here is on the word “world”. In the church however, the evil should not be tolerated. The obligatory “prooftexting”: Mt 5:48, Mt 18:17, 1 Cor 5:13, 2 Cor 6:14, Rev 2:20 and I can give you many more passages if you think these are not enough.

…Would love to hear more of your thoughts on why, John. You’ve become a sort of drive-by stalker here. You drop by to say “Be gracious!”, crack a joke, and then disappear for two weeks.

There are those of us who simply will never “give glory to God” in the ubf manner of thinking. And there are some of us who spark uncomfortable dialogues. That won’t change any time soon.

By the way, if someone wanted nice comfy dialogues, I stepped away (and so did others) during Lent this past year. 40 days of no comments or articles from me. Did anyone start polite, nice, safe-for-ubf conversations?

Haha. bad joke.

I know I’m weird. My own mom tells everyone that I am “odd.” So I love weird and odd and even messy, which might well describe this website. Actually, if I think about it, the Bible itself is rather messy!

Isn’t the Bible a whole lot messier than ubfriends? (killing women, children, infants, whole communities, coitus interruptus, description of genitalia, graphic sexuality, adultery, incest, bestiality, political intrigue, etc?)

“God hates visionary dreaming; it makes the dreamer proud and pretentious. The man who fashions a visionary ideal of community (wish dream) demands that it be realized by God, by others, and by himself. He enters the community of Christians with his demands, sets up his own law, and judges the brethren…”

http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/05/26/wish-dream-destroys-christian-community/

“…diversity of opinion on many issues within the Body of Christ. As the gospel welcomes people of every tribe and tongue and nation, it also challenges us to stretch ourselves beyond what is comfortable. The degree to which we imitate Christ is not measured by how much we love those who are similar to us, but by how much we embrace those who are different.”

The three main points that I see are:

1) diversity of opinion.
2) stretch ourselves beyond what is comfortable.
3) loving, embracing those who are different from us.

Do you think ubfriends has deviated from this “original purpose”?

If you allow me to be an admin, then I would like to help steer this online community back to its original purpose.

My hope and desire and work is to bring my ubf experience into the light–the light of history and the light of public scrutiny and the light of what I call “ubf sheep light”. I want ubf “sheep” to start realizing the oddities they see are not “just them”, but things many thousands of people have also seen for decades around the world.

Speaking of coming into the light… my first two books are FREE on Amazon today and tomorrow.

My third book, Unexpected Christianity: The Penguin Narratives, will be published tomorrow on Amazon, to be available this week.

Do a search on Amazon.com for “ubf”, my books show up.

I am not a virtuous martyr. It’s been proven that numerous ubf leaders are benevolent dictators, that’s not just “something I think”. It’s also been demonstrated that the ubf ideological system is what produces such a flawed directorship style of leadership.

Also as Sharon correctly points out, I am not back handed, mean spirited, or otherwise defective. Nor am I still wounded or at a presumed lower stage in my spiritual journey.

Was my critique over the top? Surely. And intentionally so. The wonderful, daisy-smelling discussions that JohnY hopes for just don’t happen. The only choices the ubf directorship has given us is silence or praise. Either “give glory to ubf” or shut up.

My aim is to make a third way, the way of sparking discussions (like this one :) that need to occur. Ultimately my goal is to bring the ubf ideology and people into the light.

Some regard this as their favorite Andy Stanley sermon of all time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMpj0cXldnk It’s well worth 35 min of your time.

I’ve made this general statement many times about ubf messages which is probably unfair, not helpful and anger inducing to many sincere ubf messengers who truly love Jesus: “UBF messages tend to be imperative driven messages (rather than indicative driven). Jesus and the gospel is never denied, but it is rarely central, because the take home point is often some imperative.”

In the message being critiqued the key verse Heb 13:8 is a lovely and wonderful indicative, but the take home point might be the imperative Heb 13:17, which in my opinion might be overplayed and causes the listener to “forget Jesus and the gospel” and to remember “obey your leaders” as the central take home message.

I am not against “obey your leaders.” In the UBF context it unfortunately often implicitly means, “don’t complain, don’t criticize, don’t disagree with your leader, because God appointed him and not you as the leader.” This has a tendency of producing timid clones who are not encouraged to develop critical thinking skills, and who think that their job/position is to primarily agree with and support their leader and their community. In my opinion, this inclines toward producing a homogenous unhealthy community, which is unappealing to most people.

As The Doctor says, “That’s not the question…”. I don’t see how placating and pacifying are healthy or Christ-like? Did I miss something?

Your questions about reconciling and bringing peace, those are indeed valid and Christ-like. We should keep asking those questions, “How can ubf/ex-ubf reconcile? How can there be peace between the two sides?” Those are excellent questions!

Also, what good is in this message that I critiqued? At best, as Forests says, it is just the standard ubf mantra. Where is the gospel in this message? Did I miss it?

I agree with JohnY when some articles or comments “just feels like a back-handed way to “get back” at the community that still touches raw nerves within you. I just don’t think using UBFriends as a tool for a public “shaming” is a way to build friendship.” – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/08/31/toledo-ubf-message-just-obey/#sthash.aECDL68z.dpuf Still my push back and kick back to this comment is that each and every person who tries to “get back” at UBF for having “spiritually abused” them is at different stages on their own spiritual journey. Wish dreams of anyone cannot be imposed on others. UBF leaders who never read UBFriends cannot impose their wish dream that UBFriends be shut down. Neither can victims of the UBF system impose their wish dreams on the UBF hierarchy.

Yet, I also agree with Brian K that “No one in 50+ years has ever dared criticize ubf messengers. They have become “untouchable”. We became conditioned to just flatter ubf messengers and say “oh thank you soooo much for your (wonderful) message…” – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/08/31/toledo-ubf-message-just-obey/#sthash.aECDL68z.dpuf My thoughts from giving any critique of anything is also to try to see and state often the positives of the opposing perspective and state some (or a lot of) positives, rather than primarily hammering virtually the entire sermon from beginning to end as though it hardly has any positive or good points.

My thoughts are an ongoing question that I personally have no answers for: “How do you/we reconcile both positions and postures and placate and pacify and bring peace to both parties?” Perhaps some have little to no desire to do so. Well, that I guess might be my own wish dream, which hopefully I do not try to impose on others.

I’m glad you finally broke your silence and shared your feelings again here. I share these critiques for two main reasons:

1) No one in 50+ years has ever dared criticize ubf messengers. They have become “untouchable”. We became conditioned to just flattery ubf messengers and say “oh thank you soooo much for your message…” I aim to demonstrate that ubf messengers are not untouchable. We can critique ubf messages. If not, then how can the messages ever possibly improve? If we don’t know what’s wrong with the messages, how would Keller’s sermons be of any use, other than to affirm flawed theology (like SS did with C.S.Lewis)?

2) The root cause of the massive leadership fallout in Toledo ubf was the Sunday messages. That was a common theme from all of us who resigned. We all gave many helpful ideas and suggestions in the years prior to 2011. But nothing changed. This harmful ubf ideology must be called out and exposed. How else could the ideology ever be redeemed? Redemption involves death, and the ubf shepherding ideology must die.

You asked one question, so I’ll answer it:

“I think we have the potential among thoughtful folks like you and everyone else on this community, and there’s a growing groundswell of young people in our UBF community that can really develop something awesome for the rest of us. How can we encourage this?”

None of the admins for ubfriends, including myself, have an agenda. We are merely posting and commenting as we feel prompted. We don’t have the personal ambition that drives most ubfers. We just want a place to share and express what we are feeling, without any kind of pressure. If you want to change the nature of ubfriends, my only suggestion is to start submitting articles and comments.

In contrast, I’d rather spend my time discussing messages that inspire, challenge us deeply, or bring healing to the soul.

For example, take Tim Keller’s message on “Reconciliation.” I think it is TK at his absolute best.
http://sermons2.redeemer.com/sites/sermons2.redeemer.com/files/sermons/RPC-Reconciliation.mp3

Or even let’s ruminate over Fr Robert Barron’s message on the “Kingdom.” Another gem of wisdom (and only in 15 minutes!). http://cms.wordonfire.org/WOF-Radio/Sermons/Sermon-Archive-for-2014/Sermon-706-Three-Parables-Three-Spiritual-Lessons.aspx

Wow, what kind of spiritual formation does it take to be able to give such messages packed with such wisdom and insight, and yet deliver it all in less than 15 minutes! Man, how I wish to be able to give messages that are on fire rather than ones that will likely come under fire.

On a side note, but I’ve been doing a lot of thinking…I’d love for UBFriends to move towards something like Relevant Magazine. I think we have the potential among thoughtful folks like you and everyone else on this community, and there’s a growing groundswell of young people in our UBF community that can really develop something awesome for the rest of us. How can we encourage this?

I propose all of us someday work together to run a “UBFriends” fundraising campaign to raise funds that we could use to hire a full-time, UBFriends “editor” with the passion and giftings to develop UBFriends to be a slick, professional, and highly edifying and thought-provoking online magazine that is more relevant than Relevant. Just a crazy thought.

Ah, glad to be back on UBFriends after a long hiatus…I’m sort of ashamed to admit, haha. Hope all of you are doing well.

Yes, we all did this, and sadly, first and foremost we did this with the Bible, it was the exception. However, we lived in the delusion that we took the Bible “as it is”, contrary to all other Christians.

“Who are your leaders in Toledo UBF?…Let’s decide to obey and submit to their authority…”

Yeah right.

“It is therefore easy to see why Authority frowns on Friendship. Every real Friendship is a sort of secession, even a rebellion. It may be a rebellion of serious thinkers against accepted claptrap or of faddists against accepted good sense; of real artists against popular ugliness or of charlatans against civilised taste; of good men against the badness of society or of bad men against its goodness. Whichever it is, it will be unwelcome to Top People. In each knot of Friends there is a sectional “public opinion” which fortifies its members against the public opinion of the community in general. Each therefore is a pocket of potential resistance. Men who have real Friends are less easy to manage or “get at”; harder for good Authorities to correct or for bad Authorities to corrupt. Hence if our masters, by force or by propaganda about “Togetherness” or by unobtrusively making privacy and unplanned leisure impossible, ever succeed in producing a world where all are Companions and none are Friends, they will have removed certain dangers, and will also have taken from us what is almost our strongest safeguard against complete servitude.”

I also share because this yet another HQUBF messenger from Chicago UBF sweeping into Toledo UBF to deliver the message of “obey your leaders”. It really is not helpful to the situation. HQUBF wants to claim a “hands off approach”. What they really do is grab you by the you-know-whats when you aren’t looking.

I know the messenger fairly well from the first year that he came to Chicago UBF in the 1990s. I believe that he is a good man, who loves Jesus, loves Scripture, personally knows God’s love and grace, and who wants to please God and do what is right before God and man.

As I skimmed through the message, I’m not as critical as you are, but I can see why you critiqued what you did. Also, most people who have been in ubf for decades (as many of the older leaders in Toledo have been) will likely find “nothing wrong” with the message.

My primary thought is that there is perhaps TMI (and thus somewhat heavy and burdensome) for a half hour plus or 45 min sermon. Thus, it may not necessarily have implanted a single predominant memorable thought or theme that moves or touches our hearts because of the immeasurable love of God and the marvelous grace of Jesus.

Then again, we are critiquing the sermon ONLY by reading it, without knowing how his delivery of it was. His preaching would surely be expressed through his personality and faith, which might come across to the audience quite differently from just reading the sermon.