Painfully Apart from the Beaten Track

Charles Spurgeon said:

At any rate, cost what it may, to separate ourselves from those who separate themselves from the truth of God is not alone our liberty, but our duty.

I have raised my protest in the only complete way by coming forth, and I shall be content to abide alone until the day when the Lord shall judge the secrets of all hearts;

but it will not seem to me a strange thing if others are found faithful, and if others judge that for them also there is no path but that which is painfully apart from the beaten track.

“Attempts at the Impossible”

Sword and Trowel

December 1988

Reproduced at www.spurgeon.org/s_and_t/dg12.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thanks to Paul Elliot for drawing my attention to this quote by citing it in "Christianity and Neo-Liberalism: The Spiritual Crisis in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and Beyond" published by the Trinity Foundation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tweet

Exposing Error Results in Virtual Assasination?

A few months ago, a para church organization called a few critics "internet assassins" and threw around all sorts of other connotative terms. (I'm assuming that the term "internet assassin" refers to one who makes unfavorable comments about another on the internet.)


Perhaps I'm naive, or getting old, but I remember a day when you could passionately debate with someone without the debate becoming personal in nature. I suppose this is more of the way Modernists confronted controversy, and now those rules don't work in our postmodern world.

James Sire in "The Universe Next Door" states that for the existentialist, because truth is grounded in one's experience, "knowledge becomes inextricably bound to the knower." Criticize my knowledge and you've criticized me. Push me towards the logical conclusion of my argument, and if I lose the argument, I've been mortally wounded somehow - literally. Because knowledge is based in my experience, then truth is based in my experience. If my experience is insufficient, then I lose worth and value on a very personal level. The inexperience of a novice becomes a personal flaw and a shameful thing rather than an opportunity to come into greater understanding of truth and maturity. Nihilism is the only logical and ultimate end.

Tweet

Thought Reform (The Last of Lifton 101)

Thought reform is accomplished through the use of psychological and environmental control processes that do not depend on physical coercion.  

Today's thought reform programs are sophisticated, subtle, and insidious, creating a psychological bond that in many ways is far more powerful than gun-at-the-head methods of influence.

The effects generally lose their potency 

when the control processes 

are lifted or neutralized in some way.

That is why most Korean War POWs gave up the content of their prison camp indoctrination programs when they came home, and why many cultists leave their groups 

• if they spend a substantial amount of time away from the group 
• or if they have an opportunity to discuss their doubts with an intimate.

Thought Reform Exists: Organized, Programmatic Influence

Margaret Thaler Singer, Ph.D

The Cult Observer

Vol. 11 No. 6 1994.

Tweet

The Dispensing of Existence (Lifton 101)

Simply described, the dispensing of existence is the group’s prerogative to decide who has the right to exist and who does not. 

This is usually not literal but means that those in the outside world are not saved, unenlightened, unconscious and they must be converted to the group's ideology. Within many "Bible-based cults" (or Biblically Christian churches that practice surreptitious manipulation), a higher way of living or greater enlightenment may be obtained by striving and modeling the group’s ideals. 

If persons do not join the group or are critical of the group, then they must be rejected by the members. Sometimes they are denounced as apostates, but they are certainly viewed as lesser Christians. All those outside the group (both within the world and those within Christianity) lose all credibility as the "special-ness" of the group promotes greater desire for milieu control and a sense of martyrdom. 

Leadership and group dogma manipulate members through fear of the outside world, because rejection of the dogma will result in loss of all social contacts in the group, loss of reputation and personal salvation. This mystical superstition also instills members with fear of complete abandonment by God so that they may anticipate befalling all manner of harm as a result of questioning or leaving the group. They are taught that their existence is dependent on the group’s favorable opinion of them and upon meeting the group’s standards of performance. 

Those within the group who demonstrate non-conformity may also lose privileges or the status of enlightenment which serves as a very potent method of negative reinforcement. In conjunction, should any member leave the group, he or she must also be rejected by those who remain in the group. Even after leaving a group, the former member tends to have a sense of loss of grace and a programmed sense of shame. Leadership thus makes it difficult to leave such groups, and departure implies a rejection of the only true means of religious transcendence. Ron Henzel’s article discusses this means of manipulation through fear in his article about walking away from his own aberrant group.

“They told me that if I left…” by Ron Henzel:

One of the most insidious features of Spiritual Abuse ... ... is the state of terror in which it leaves so many of its victims. People who flee Spiritual Abuse are in a double-bind: in the very process of fleeing from the oppression that comes from being part of the group, they are terrorized by the threats of the leadership and various members -- threats of dire consequences, punishment from God, and even eternal damnation.

Adapted from and expanded upon from the original source, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of Brain Washing in China by Robert Jay Lifton. 

In chapter 22 entitled "Ideological Totalism," Lifton details the major defining techniques that hallmark surreptitious manipulation, formulated from his experience working with prisoners who survived a Chinese brainwashing program while serving in the Korean War.

Tweet

Doctrine Over Person (Lifton 101)

Member's personal experiences are subordinated to the sacred science and any contrary experiences must be denied or reinterpreted to fit the ideology of the group.  

The end ideology of the group must be maintained by any means, even at the personal expense or the personal suffering of the group members. Love for the system or ideology supersedes that of the people, places or lesser causes. This promotes hatred and intolerance of all opposing critics or ideologies (sadly, often including those within the group).

Tweet

Loading the Language (Lifton 101)

The group interprets or uses words and phrases in new ways so that often the outside world does not understand.

Connotation also plays a major role in the loading of language. A most potent means of loading the language comes through accusations such as "gossip", "rebellion", "Jezebel" and the like, as these are modifiers to be avoided at all costs by membership.

Please review these previous posts regarding the nature of the use of connotation, thought-stopping cliché and neologism to manipulate individuals without their awareness of the process:

Tweet

Sacred Science (Lifton 101)

The group's doctrine or ideology is considered to be the ultimate Truth, beyond all questioning or dispute. 

Truth is not to be found outside the group. The leader, as the spokesperson for God or all humanity, is likewise above criticism. Many such leaders have patterns of avoiding accountability and demonstrating aggression towards critics. Leaders and their religious followers often have the appearance of accountability to a presbytery and an internal church government, but often the systems have been designed to avoid all accountability. Presbyters are often friends, associates or subordinates of the group leader(s). 

The article “Authoritarianism in the Church” by Steve Martin that appears on the Battered Sheep website explains some of these aspects of the “sacred science.” (This article also appears in the Founders Journal 15 (Winter 1994). Martin states this specifically:

First, the sin of authoritarianism exists when pastors and other office holders speak with binding authority where God Himself has not spoken in His written Word. Second, the sin of authoritarianism exists when pastors and other office holders usurp the Lordship of Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the lives of God's people by deciding the will of God for them where Scripture is silent.

The excellent article examines the development of authoritarianism and offers resources to help Christians through the process of repentance and healing. Through the sins of idolatry, prayerlessness, unbelief, lack of love for the sheep and pride, shepherds fall into the trap of authoritarian patterns of behavior. Congregations also promote the development of the sin of authoritarianism through their own tendency towards idol-worship, unbelief and the fear of man (both of fellow congregants and the church leadership.

Adapted from and expanded upon from the original source, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of Brain Washing in China by Robert Jay Lifton. 

In chapter 22 entitled "Ideological Totalism," Lifton details the major defining techniques that hallmark surreptitious manipulation, formulated from his experience working with prisoners who survived a Chinese brainwashing program while serving in the Korean War.

Tweet

The Cult of Confession (Lifton 101)

Sins, as defined by the group, are to be confessed either to a personal monitor or publicly to the group. There is no confidentiality; members' "sins," "attitudes," and "faults" are discussed and exploited by the leaders. Even if not obviously promoted by the group, information is collected (usually automatically without set guidelines for collection) and fed to leadership. Shameful past events may then be exploited to manipulate individual compliance or as evidence for disciplinary actions. Information about those who leave the group is also exploited after they leave to enhance the milieu control. Sometimes, "sins" are confabulated to instill members with fear to decrease their chances of contacting dissidents or members who have left the group.

Tweet

Demand for Purity (Lifton 101)

Within a manipulative group, the demand for purity describes the “black and white” or the “all or nothing” thought that pervades the ideology and leadership of the group. This follows naturally from the rigid standards of perfection that the group ideology establishes and often develops out of necessity due to milieu control. The world is viewed as black and white and the members are constantly exhorted to conform to the ideology of the group and strive for the extreme perfection. Dissidents or competing ideologies are labeled as entirely untrustworthy and are given the connotation of near-heresy. (In psychology, this ego defense is termed "splitting" and is a normal, temporary function of early childhood.) As a support to the milieu control, the demand for purity enhances the group norm and ideals of focus.

Tweet

Accountabitlity

A little intermission from Lifton 101:


Much was possible to a man in solitude, but some things were possible only to a man in companionship, and of these the most important was balance.

No mind was so good that it did not need another mind to counter and equal it, and to save it from conceit and bigotry and folly.

Charles Williams

"The Place of the Lion", Chapter 15

quote in Humphrey Carpenter's

The Inklings

Tweet

Mystical Manipulation (Lifton 101)

Mystical Manipulation, in the context of a manipulative group, is simply the manipulation of planned experiences so that they appear spontaneous.

 Ministers often use this technique to demonstrate divine authority or spiritual advancement to gain and further solidify the confidence of their followers. Apparent special gifts or talents of the minister allow the leadership of the group to reinterpret events, scripture, and experiences as he or she wishes for the ultimate benefit of the group.

The term “vision” and the practice of “vision casting” has recently become popular in many Evangelical Christian circles and represents a certain type of mystical manipulation. (Frankly, it sounds akin to "spell casting" to me, although I suspect that it is more like what the Pentecostals/Charismatics refer to as prophesying regarding the direction and misison of the congregation.)

Members are encouraged to be visionary and to follow the visions of their leaders to further the Kingdom of God and the mission of the group. A pastor of a church certainly gives spiritual direction and guidance, but many use this duty to guide their congregations towards ideals that may not be germane to the mission of the New Testament Church.

 Fishburn has this to say in “Confronting the Idolatry of Family”:

Yet, many Protestant congregations are in a state of spiritual drift, in bondage to some part of the American Dream. Although denominational leaders, seminary professors, and pastors may know that dreams of American manifest destiny influenced nineteenth-century theology, few seem to recognize the ways in which the American Dream still influences the church today. The task of giving special direction to a congregation that does not embody some of the attitudes of a family-pew theology calls for pastors with the convictions of a prophet, able to tell the people of God that their loyalties are misplaced. (pg 64)

This technique may also apply to alignment of the group or group leaders with powerful, respected and orthodox others who may be enlisted to make statements or write opinionated articles in support of the cultic group or leaders. 

When a well-respected and established leader or group lends their name and support to a spiritual abuser or manipulator, the public depends on and trusts in the recommendation of that established leader, interpreting it as a sign of legitimacy. Ministries that recommend questionable teachers and sources put honest people at risk, as those who trust them will trust their discernment.

Safe people tend to recommend and associate with safe others, and their recommendations have a very potent influence on the public as a result. Media presentations may also connote legitimacy when they are well done and impressive in our commercial culture of consumerism. Photographs that exemplify the desired persona of the group provide a powerful means of suggesting the ideal of the group. Mystical manipulation overlaps somewhat with milieu control and supports the desired milieu in this way.

Personal prophecy and current day manifestation of the “gifts of the Holy Spirit” provide us the most obvious examples of mystical manipulation. Within Charismatic/Pentecostal groups, collected information or desired behavior may come in the form of messages of prophecy. These systems tend to operate on “grapevine communication” because most manipulative groups intervene on behalf of their members. Leadership in spiritually abusive groups often assume responsibility for the sanctification and spiritual advancement of their followers, so such grapevine knowledge of the activities of their followers becomes a vital tool.

Although, divine knowledge may be at work at times, in controlling groups, leaders often use the information that they’ve collected about a member to manipulate them, giving the impression that their knowledge came from a divine source. “Thus saith the Lord” or “I had a dream about you” demonstrate this kind of mystical power, suggesting and reinforcing the special connection that the leader has with God.

Tweet

Milieu Control (Lifton 101)

Most simply stated, “Milieu Control” is the control of an environment by controlling the information and activities within the environment. 

Pertaining to manipulative and closed groups, this involves control of communication and generation of acceptable information to be disseminated among the membership. Ultimately, the group seeks to control the thought environment of individual members, and it is this internal milieu control that produces the isolation from society at large. 

The cognitive dissonance produced by the incongruent messages received from the outside creates the natural desire to withdraw or filter information that does not coincide with information within the group. It’s too draining and stressful to constantly try to reckon conflicting worldviews, so isolationism seen in closed systems of thought is often a necessary adaptation. 

Healthy people do filter information, but in closed systems, the group dictates what sources of information are restricted in an effort to maintain compliance and limit dissent. “Love bombing” is a most effective means of recruiting new membership and falls under the category of milieu control. Groups thrive and grow, primarily by their ability to create an ideal environment that members tend to associate with pleasant, safe and nurturing feelings. A utopia can be defined as an ideally perfect place, generally in a social and moral sense. The creation of the idealistic world of rest and special bliss without the cumbersome burdens of life is very seductive. 

Most people who have participated in such a group and left, despite the heartaches of their experiences, long for a return to the “feeling” that the manipulative group appeared to create for them. Often, leadership will tell members that their group is the only place where one can find this type of comfort which makes those who enjoy the environment less likely to leave the group. Free exchange of information is tightly controlled by threats of accusation of gossip or "touching not the anointed" leadership in manipulative groups. 

Another popular phrase that is often used to discourage critical evaluation of legitimate information within Christian churches is the admonishment to refrain from “sewing discord among the brethren.” This is not a blanket command however and would be an inappropriate response to false teaching and error. Perhaps the most dangerous harm to the milieu of a group occurs as a result of drawing leadership into question. This is a taboo in spiritually abusive groups in particular. 

Stories concocted for the purpose of "damage control" (prevent membership from thinking critically about events or arguments that might draw the ideology or leadership into question) also fall under this category so that members are fearful or reluctant to fairly consider information produced by dissidents. Information from outside sources is often criticized and discounted to discourage acceptance by group members. Connotation is a powerful tool in the maintenance of milieu control, often aimed at creating the perception that certain types of information are tainted or dangerous. (See “Biblical Modifiers.”) 

Maintenance of group milieu within a closed system, religious or otherwise, is perhaps the most demanding aspects of thought reform and manipulative systems, but it is a profoundly effective one.

Tweet

Tragically Misplaced Love of the Ideal Family

Excerpt from

"Confronting the Idolatry of Family"

by Janet Fishburn

The loyalty of church members to visions of an ideal family is a tragically misplaced love. Where love of parents, children, or spouse commands more commitment than love to God, the one who loves is bound to be disappointed. Love to family members and spouse can be an expression of love to God. But that is different from the kind of faith in the family found in many congregations.

Tweet

"Biblical" Modifiers and Discernment

Of the many oddities of post-Christian culture, many in the church seem to have also inherited a tendency towards a type of postmodern discernment (or lack thereof). Postmodernism prefers intuitive reasoning and many Christians who have been raised in the era of postmodernism prefer it as well. "Heart knowledge" is preferred to "head knowledge" in many denominations, thus many Christian leaders actually teach this kind of subjective reasoning and validation of truth. Also consider that we are now bombarded with considerably more information that we can reasonably consider, and ideology is now marketed right along with goods and services. If we possess adequate discernment skills, we may have no time or opportunity to objectively evaluate things, especially ideas.

We Christians fall prey to this all the time. It’s very easy to assume that when someone uses the same type of religious language that we are talking about the same religious concepts. This is increasingly not the case in our information-driven world. Christians even capitalize on this, using the emotional connotation of certain words and concepts to package their beliefs. Trusting the language of the heart can pull us into subjective reasoning if we are not discerning. Also, if we trust the source of the information, we also let our guard down, assuming that we don’t have to critically evaluate new messages. When we trust language, even when we have great confidence in the source, we make ourselves vulnerable.

Tweet

The Disturbing Return of the Daughters

Here's my second attempt at posting a new comment on Anna Sophia and Elizabeth Botkin’s new film, ”The Return of the Daughters.” I sent my first attempt into cyberspace oblivion. There are so many things about the film that are disturbing to me, and I was amazed to see how “emotionally engaged” my very logical husband became when we viewed it together. 

We were both disturbed for a wide variety of reasons, probably because the general premise of young women desiring to live godly lives to impact society is such a desirable premise. But like so much of Vision Forum influenced ideology, “you get much more than you bargained for.” I actually thought at one point, that it might be nice to have Dave Letterman’s blink counter set to sound whenever “Biblical” was used as a modifier.

Vision Forum’s description of this film states:

This highly-controversial documentary will take viewers into the homes of several young women who have dared to defy today’s anti-family culture in pursuit of a biblical approach to daughterhood, using their in-between years to pioneer a new culture of strength and dignity, and to rebuild Western Civilization, starting with the culture of the home….. As the home goes, so often goes the church, and society at large. Learn along with Anna Sofia and Elizabeth, the fulfilling, exciting life of impact and accomplishment that young women can and should have. Discover the power of the family unit and a picture of the biblical home as the center of dominion work — a vibrant center of education, ministry, evangelism, culture, entrepreneurialism, and hospitality.

Certainly, this film represents great ideals, and many of them are vital to Christianity, representing core Christian principles. The film presents a vignette of the lives of several young women that either work for their fathers in their own place of business, volunteer or work from home to generate income to help support the vision of the father. 

What is more subtle is the reason why these young women are portrayed as shining examples of “Biblical womanhood” that is not directly and obviously stated in the film. The film doesn’t argue their point for the sole purpose of singing the glories of staying at home but as a positive support of their narrow, legalistic interpretation that this is the only acceptable “Biblical” standard for all unwed women. 

In keeping with the patrarchical doctrines and practices taught by Vision Forum and the Family Integrated Churches, I think that a more appropriate name for the film would be “The Return to the Fathers,” because I found the focus of the film to be the glorified ideal of the father-daughter relationship. Brothers get a plug in the Extras section, but mothers barely appear on camera.  After the focus on the first young woman and her family, there were few mothers on screen. I do specifically recall the mother of one of the girls appearing in the film, but only in portrait where she is shown embracing the girl’s father. 

If examining the content of the film, the focus is not on family or home, so the “Return of the Daughters” calls really for a return of daughters to return home to their father’s vision for them. The Botkin girls stare hypnotically into the camera with come-hither gazes, and everyone else is interviewed in documentary style, looking away from the camera’s eye. There’s been discussion on some blogs about the disturbing nature of some of this technique, especially when some interviewed demonstrate some unnatural lack of eye movement. Some people are trained to control eye movement to conceal information about the truthfulness of their statements, although this might have been due to the use of a teleprompter. This is a great distraction in the film, especially in the Extras sections where Geoff Botkin and Doug Phillips explain the “Biblical Foundations” for the belief system that they advocate in the film. 

The Visionary Daughters website posted a clip of this section online, but it was coincidentally removed after only a day. 

My husband was quite incensed over some of the poorly chosen language used in a particular clip within the “Courtship and Marriage” section, also included in the Extras on the DVD. If anyone has an opportunity to watch it, I would like to hear feedback on that section specifically via private correspondence. 

My husband was actually offended by some of the just poorly worded commentary in that section. In fact, I think that it’s so disturbing, unless interpreted with previous knowledge of the subject of courtship and within the mindset of the Christian community that embraces the courtship model, I will not present the transcript of that section here. I interpreted that section with understanding of the intent of the speaker, but I have grave concerns that those outside of patriarchy’s influence would not be so kind in evaluating it.

Tweet

The Term "Biblical" Becomes a Thought Stopping Cliche?

Patriarchy and the Family Integrated Church crowd often use connotation and neologism to communicate a concept without all the negative connotation, but they get their ideas across.

How do they do that?

This is a response that I posted elsewhere online in response to a comment of the use of the term "non-normative" as a term that is understood to be "sin." Likewise, in a positive sense, the word "Biblical" is also used to connotate anything that is unquestionably good. Here is the response that I gave, basically as a demonstration of how Cialdini's "weapons of influence" can be used against us in religious or worship settings and how neologism and connotation play into this subtle form of manipulation.

Connotation and neologism is a technique of thought reform. Satan has been doing it since the Garden of Eden (”Ye shall not SURELY die…”). Call it beguiling, call it manipulation, call it spiritual abuse, call it propaganda, call it newspeak, call it patriospeak or patriobabble. What is it? Maybe it’s worse than original sin? And unsuspecting people eat it right up, especially in the age of postmodern advertising and kitsch. It’s a religious version of a shopping network, selling ideas (and grenades) by capitalizing on image.

It’s subtle. The litigious can say that they have not claimed that when they said A that they meant B, while everyone (outside of their influence of title and position) knows that A and B are the same things and are used in the same way. The amazing thing about the process is that it causes cognitive dissonance. 

Because the very nature of what they say about A and B is the same and yet contradiction, the critical thinking process in your brain pauses because of the congruences. This puts a person in a highly suggestible state. It can be dangerous if you are not very determined to stand by your doubts, because the very confusion that is created by the statements makes one easier to manipulate. Now, put this in the context of a sermon, where you are constrained from questioning and naturally want to conform to the group. 

Social proof makes it tremendously hard to resist, all while trying to figure things out. It pulls your proverbial legs out from under you. Now have an authority figure call you up in front of the congregation for some reason. Say it is for an object lesson or demonstration of a point the authority is trying to make. Humans like to respond to authority, as a general rule. There you have both authority as a pressure compounded with social pressure. 

And what if you really like your authority? We tend to comply when we like the person that has petitioned our compliance. What if he has done the same type of thing for us in the past? (He’s served as a participant in sermons that I’ve preached…) That’s reciprocity at work. Throw that into the mix when they are trying to sell you a contradictory idea. The pressure is tremendous. 

Okay, throw “non-normative” out there for people under these circumstances, with all these pressures at work. Hear “non-normative” a couple of times, and cognitive dissonance demands attention and seeks the path of least resistance to alleviate the psychological stress that the discontinuity produces. It will do so by just accepting the term without criticism or thought about how it is used. You now understand that non-normative means sin. 

These neologisms (Or as Doug Phillip reportedly states “He who defines, wins”) actually stop your critical thought. They present only one thinkable alternative then, and use emotion to blackmail their followers into accepting their alternative. This is very akin to bounded choice, when you believe you have reasonable choices, but those alternatives are presented in a way that really offers no viable choice. Every time a person hears that term, their critical thinking just stops. This is what Lifton termed “Loading the Language.” If you want to sell an ideology, you have to have a slogan and buzz terms. They are powerful weapons against the unsuspecting.

Tweet

Closing the Ideological Sale

Indoctrination and reinforcement of the changed aspects of self that have been set off balance through cognitive dissonance are often accomplished through social mentoring and this helps solidify the transformation. So if I can get you to feel something, the quicker that I can get you to behave in accordance with your feelings, the more solid the transformation becomes.

"Can you say, Amen?" That's a "three-fer." I've invited you to think in agreement with me, I've asked you to respond with an action of repeating me, and I've likely engaged your emotion. The quicker that I can get you to reinforce the shift or change, the better. This is great to know when buying a car. The salesman wants you to get in the car, drive it, love it and want it. If he can get your name and number (if you weren't absolutely determined to consider buying the car), and you like him, he's much closer to closing the sale. The quicker that he can facilitate this, all the better

Tweet

Pharisees and the Double Bind?

Getting ControlIndoctrination and reinforcement of the changed aspects of self that have been set off balance through cognitive dissonance are often accomplished through social mentoring and this helps solidify the transformation. So if I can get you to feel something, the quicker that I can get you to behave in accordance with your feelings, the more solid the transformation becomes.

"Can you say, Amen?" That's a "three-fer." I've invited you to think in agreement with me, I've asked you to respond with an action of repeating me, and I've likely engaged your emotion. The quicker that I can get you to reinforce the shift or change, the better. This is great to know when buying a car. The salesman wants you to get in the car, drive it, love it and want it. If he can get your name and number (if you weren't absolutely determined to consider buying the car), and you like him, he's much closer to closing the sale. The quicker that he can facilitate this, all the better.

Double Bind

The double bind is a type of cognitive dissonance wherein you are "damned if you do and damned if you don't." Jesus referred to the technique of the “double bind” when he chastised the Pharisees for their “thought stopping” riddle regarding swearing by the temple, which meant nothing, versus the more binding oath of swearing by the gold of the temple (Mt. 23:16-17).

Contradictory and/or complex information communicated congruently causes temporary confusion and disorientation (e.g., The harder I try to understand, the more I will never understand. Understand?) The Pharisees were intimidating (emotion) and demanded others to agree. They also wanted to solicit behavior and modeled it for others. Such a divisive presentation of information in a controlled environment and in pressured conversation induces most people to respond by a temporary suspension of thought. There you are, in front of a Pharisee, and you are under pressure. They are also dangling your eternal fate over your own head, baiting you to comply. Resistance isn't futile, but it is often difficult under certain circumstances. This causes adaptation of behavior to fit the circumstance created to establish dominance and manipulative control over the will of the individual.

That's one way that thought reform can go to church or meet you at the door when you arrive.

Tweet

Other Denominations Sliding into Patriarchy?

A comment from a blog:

It started out with woman cannot preach, then women cannot teach men, ok…people can accept that but then it starts sliding toward woman cannot be in positions where they have men reporting to them. It also includes a lot of teaching that revolves around women’s roles not only in church but society and family that are detailed to the point of lacking grace. It puts them in a place of judging women not based on the fruit of their spirit but on their societal roles and how well they stay in that box.

It is to the point where a professor teaching the Hebrew language at SWBTS was fired because she was teaching men in her class! The new president decided that was not right AFTER he told her the job was safe upon his inaugeration. So, the president had to sin to follow scripture? This woman had a very sick husband and was left with no health insurance and no job!

It becomes a checklist. Much like Islam is a check list religion. But it always evolves into legalism because no one can say, well, this is the exact cut off age where women can teach boys/men. Or, is explaining how to run this computer program in the church office teaching men?

I believe the whole problem is based on a misunderstanding of Biblical authority in the NT. Jesus turned everything on it’s head with servanthood, humility, the first will be last, etc. He was the opposite of the authority of the Pharisees. And they hated Him for it.

Tweet

Critique of the "Tenets": Calling Things That Are Not As Though They Were?

Jennifer Epstein is a highly controvertial figure who has challenged Doug Phillips and Vision Forum in a variety of ways. She is much maligned, but whatever she has or has not done, she and those who comment on her website make many cogent arguments against patriarchy as the most informed and ethical interpretation of Scripture pertaining to 21st Century Christian living and family. I encourage anyone interested in this topic to give these reviews serious consideration. She presents a thorough review of Vision Forum's defining document of patriarchy in a three-part series of articles on her blog.

Please note some selected excerpts from Ms. Epstein’s blog articles:

“This is NOT a debate about personal beliefs, but only how these tenets can be supported biblically.” (from Part II) In this article, what I’d like to do is examine a document prepared by Doug Phillips, Phil Lancaster and R.C. Sproul, Jr. entitled The Tenets Of Biblical Patriarchy. In the Editor’s Note to The Tenets it states, “We view this as an accurate working document, and invite feedback from anyone as we attempt to improve this statement over time.” I’m grateful that Doug Phillips has extended the offer to provide feedback. Apparently this offer is open to anyone. However, no one should believe that such an offer is a sincere solicitation for constructive criticism. When Doug asks for feedback, what he really means is that he only wants to hear from those who already agree with him. (from Part I)Doug Phillips and other Patriarchy leaders have pawned off Patriarchy as not merely being “biblical,” which even that is very debatable. Doug Phillips has pawned off Patriarchy as being a “Gospel centered doctrine....” "For a long time, I treated Patriarchy as though it was “Gospel centered” — that it was an essential and indispensable aspect of my walk with Christ. Now I recognize that it’s not “Gospel centered” and may even in some ways be contrary to the Gospel message, especially when it comes to the Gospel message of grace. I’m starting to see that many elements of Patriarchy are legalistic and, therefore, contrary to grace. Elevating any doctrine to a level of being “Gospel centered,” when the doctrine may, in fact, just be legalism, is Pharisaical. " (from Part II) After posting Part One in this series, I came to recognize the centrality of Patriarchy to Doug Phillips’ entire “vision,” or what he calls his “vision casting.” Doug Phillips refers to Patriarchy as a “Gospel centered doctrine,” when it is nothing of the sort. Much of patriarchy is just extra-biblical legalism, and legalism is contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Gospel of Christ is about grace, not legalism. Why then does Doug Phillips claim that Patriarchy is “Gospel centered”? Certainly, Patriarchy is “centered” to something, but not to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Did Jesus or any of the Apostles ever teach Patriarchy? Did they ever command Patriarchy? No, in fact, the Apostle Paul explicitly warned the Corinthians that they should beware of anyone who came and preached “another Gospel.” (from Part III)

Are Vision Forum’s Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy Biblical?
Part I:

• God as Masculine
• Image of God and Gender Roles
• Authority of Fathers

Part II:

• Family Church and State
• Men and Women: Spheres of Dominion
• Procreation

Part III:

• Education and Training of Children
• A Father and His Older Children
• Sufficiency and Appliation of Scripture

Tweet

The Many Elements of Spiritual Abuse

David Henke defined Spiritual Abuse by listing five specific characteristics that are found within churches that manifest the
phenomenon.




From Watchman Fellowship's Profile of Spiritual Abuse

• Authoritarian Systems and leaders over-emphasize authority
• Image Conscious Maintains high standards to validate specialness to God
• Suppresses Criticism No questioning of doctrine or leadership is permitted
• Perfectionistic Blessings come through performance and noncompliance is punished.
• Unbalanced Abusive religions must distinguish themselves from all other religions so they can claim to be distinctive and therefore special to God. They become unbalanced in their focus on peripheral or intramural doctrines of the faith that eventually eclipse the essential doctrines.

Tweet

Hegemony of the Family Integrated Church

The Adventures of Interracting With the FIC:

A note from a blog

I attended a family conference several years ago in St. Louis with my daughter. I am an elder in a reformed presbyterian denomination. When the fact came out in conversations with others that I attended an “demoninational church,’” I was shunned by most.


One man actually attacked me verbally at dinner table. He looked at me with anger and disgust and remarked how denominational churches were not loving churches. I thought that maybe he should take a look at himself. Another remarked that his house group just follows the Bible; they do not need a formal leadership. I thought, well..."If they read the Bible, maybe they would see that God appointed elders and deacons as officers in the church."

Tweet

Resisting Influence: Scarcity and Competition

Cialdini’s Principles of Social Influence

Scarcity
[Context: Competition]
People assign more value to opportunities when they are less available—if there are fewer resources and less time to get them, we want it more

The Basics

Principle holds true for two reasons:

• Things that are difficult to attain are typically more valuable – availability of item can serve as a shortcut heuristic cue to its quality
• As things become less accessible, we lose freedoms – respond to loss of freedoms by wanting to have them more than before

Tweet

Resisting Influence: Authority and Credibility

Cialdini’s Principles of Social Influence

Authority
[Context: Credibility]

People naturally respond to authority with compliance

The Basics

• Milgram’s studies of obedience provide evidence of a strong pressure for compliance with the requests of authority figures
• Strength of tendency to obey comes from systematic socialization of society members that obedience constitutes correct conduct
• Frequently adaptive to obey dictates of genuine authorities because such individuals usually possess high levels of knowledge, wisdom, and power
• Deference to authorities can occur in a mindless fashion as a decision-making shortcut
• Tendency to respond to "symbols and signs of authority" rather than to its substance
• Failure to distinguish between Just and Unjust Authority

Tweet

Resisting Influence: Liking and Friendship

Cialdini’s Principles of Social Influence

Liking

[Context: Friendship] We want people to like us and

we like those who show that they like us

The Basics

• People prefer to say “yes” to individuals they know and like

How It's Exploited

Persuasion experts manipulate common factors that influence their likeability.

• Physical attractiveness – engender “halo” effect that extends to favorable impressions of other traits such as talent, kindness, and intelligence – attractive people usually more successful in changing attitudes and getting requests granted
• Similarity – we like people who are like us; we more willing to say “yes” to them, often in an unthinking manner
• Praise – compliments generally enhance liking and compliance; although can backfire if used excessively and transparently
• Familiarity – repeated contact with a person or thing normally facilitates liking; holds when contact takes place under positive, not negative circumstances
• Association – making connections to positive things, profiteers seek to share positivity through process of association
• Shadowing- influence agent exhibits non-verbal behaviors that match those of the target individual, creates a pseudo-comparability

Best Defense

• Resist this principle by developing a special sensitivity to suspicious and undue liking from the requester
• Separate the requester from the request, and make compliance decisions based solely on the merits of the offer – not your emotions about the requester.

Prepared by Philip Zimbardo and Cindy X. Wang

©2006-2007, Philip G. Zimbardo

Tweet

What is the Family Integrated Church?

Updated 22Mar23

Here's an interesting excerpt from Jennifer Epstein's blog. Regardless of what you believe about this controversial figure, her description of her experience at the FIC was an eye-opener for me!

The only element I would add to the list below is that Sunday School and age-oriented education or activities for children are forbidden as "Social Darwinism."

I found the practices regarding the Eucharist/ Lord's Supper to be quite interesting. A woman cannot reach for the Host herself (independent of her "patriarch") because of her gender-related need for a male intercessor? However, if her husband is out of town, it's perfectly acceptable for her male toddler to bring the Host to her? Okay... (well, not so okay...)

From her introduction:

Among the other things that Doug Phillips promotes through The Vision Forum and Vision Forum Ministries is “Family Integrated Church.” Doug Phillips originally founded the “Uniting Church and Family,” a website and annual conference for training patriarchs to start their own churches, often home churches. This idea, which he originally “borrowed” from Eric Wallace’s book “Uniting Church and Home,” was initially headed up by John Thompson. The name was eventually changed to the National Center for Family Integrated Churches and is currently headed up by Doug’s friend, Scott Brown…. 

The first issue I shall address is the impression that at least some FICs give that they’re not particularly open and welcoming of “outsiders.” Some have gotten the impression that in order to be welcome in an FIC, you first have to meet a certain set of criteria.

The criteria may often include:

• Homeschool only
• Patriarchy
• No women working outside the home
• No daughters in college
• Full-quiver
• Dress code: Women in dresses only (sometimes with
  headcoverings), men in suit and tie only
• Courtship only 

Here, I will add to Epstein's list: 

• No Age-oriented education of children 

• No dividing of the families for religious activities 

•  A woman my not partake of the Lord's Supper unless it is given to her by a male from her household who has deemed her worthy, or the duty may be assigned to an arranged overseer

Those who don’t meet the criteria may be permitted to attend, at least for a time. However, they will often be made to feel that they don’t fit in, and that will also be reinforced from the teachings in the pulpit. They will be expected to conform. Image is very important in many FICs.

I might also add to the list of criteria —

“family only.”

Tweet

Resisting Influence: Social Proof

Cialdini’s Principles of Social Influence

Social Proof
[Context: Consensus]

A means to determine what is correct by finding out what other people think is correct.

A person tends to view behavior as more correct in a given context (to the degree that one sees others performing it)

The Basics

• Principle can be used to stimulate a person’s compliance by informing the individual that many other individuals have been complying (unanimous compliance and compliance by famous or authoritative people is most effective)
• Provides us with a shortcut for determining how to behave – while at the same time, makes one vulnerable to persuasion experts
• Most influential under two conditions:
  Uncertainty – situation is ambiguous; become more likely to attend to the actions of others and accept those actions as more correct
  Similarity – people are inclined to follow the lead of similar others
  

Tweet

Resisting Influence: Consistency

Cialdini’s Principles of Social Influence


Consistency
[Context: Commitments]

People desire to look consistent

within their words, beliefs, attitudes, and deeds

The Basics

• Good personal consistency is highly valued by society
• Consistent conduct provides a beneficial approach to daily life
• Affords a valuable shortcut through complex decision-making; being consistent with earlier decisions reduces need to process relevant information in future decisions

Tweet

Resisting Influence: Reciprocity and Contexts of Obligation

Cialdini’s Principles of Social Influence

Reciprocity
[Context: Obligation]

The rule of reciprocity requires that one person try to repay, in kind,

what another person has provided

The Basics

• Supports the giving of favors since repayment is expected from the recipient
• Sense of future obligation makes it possible to develop continuing relationships, transactions, and exchanges in society
• Members of society are trained from childhood to abide by the reciprocity rule or suffer social disapproval

Tweet

How We are Influenced and Persuaded

Robert Cialdini's

"Weapons of Influence"

When in new situations, all we human beings cope in similar ways. New circumstances bombard us with information, all ideas that we must put into perspective, so we trust impressions and “rules of thumb” to make the many decisions that new situations demand of us. Especially in today’s information driven world, we find the need to take these “shortcuts,” especially when we are bombarded with new, complex ideas in new settings.

Here are the primary shortcuts that we fearfully and wonderfully made creatures use to cut through the information:

• Reciprocity (Tendency to repay others in kind.)
• Commitment and Consistency (Tendency to portray themselves ad consistent examples in word, deed, beliefs and attitudes. It is a mechanism of commitment to one’s personality and self-understanding.)
• Social Proof (Investigation of truth by observing and/or complying with consensus.)
• Liking (Seeking to be liked and want to be treated as though they are liked.)
• Authority (Tendency to respond and submit to authority.)
• Scarcity (Tendency to value items or opportunities that are limited.)

Under reasonable circumstances, these otherwise practical techniques serve us to cut through the processing of information; however, these “shortcuts” can provide a foothold for our manipulation. Learning how these tendencies work can help us resist undue influence and make better decisions.

Tweet

Be Heroic!

Philip Zimbardo in his Overview of
"The Lucifer Effect"

In our final chapter 16, the sun shines again, and lights up the dungeons we’ve inhabited for the past 15 chapters Although most people succumb to the power of situational forces, not all do. How do they resist social influence? What kinds of strategies might help the reader to become inoculated against unwanted attempts to get him or her to conform, comply, obey, and yield? I outline a 10-step generic program to build resistance to mind control strategies and tactics. Chapter 16 also presents a thought experiment to involve people in engaging in progressively greater degrees of altruistic deeds that promote civic virtue.

Tweet

Hostile Imaginations & Faces of the Enemy

What does it take for the citizens of one society to hate the citizens of another society to the degree that they want to segregate them, torment them, even to kill them? It requires a ‘hostile imagination,’ a psychological construction embedded deeply in their minds by propaganda that transforms those others into “The Enemy.” That image is a soldier’s most powerful motive, one that loads his rifle with ammunition of hate and fear. That image of a dreaded enemy threatening one’s personal well-being and the society’s national security emboldens mothers and fathers to send sons to war, and empowers governments to rearrange priorities to turn ploughshares into swords of destruction.

Tweet