I always find great pleasure when speaking with Dr. John Weaver. As he waits for the upcoming release of his latest work, Technology, Management and the Evangelical Church, he's busy thinking about his next book – all of which became necessary for him to write after learning more about the complicated tapestry of abuses within the modern Evangelical Church in the US. I love how he sets me thinking about the language that I use, his rich sense of scholarship that drives questions about the origins of terminology, and how it affects us.
Showing posts with label unwritten rules in churches. Show all posts
Showing posts with label unwritten rules in churches. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 3, 2019
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Coming to a Deeper Understanding of the Unwritten Rules of a Group: Oral Tradition, Oral Law, the “Hidden Curriculum”
Labels:
techniques,
unwritten rules in churches
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Hank Hanegraaff and the “Nicest People You Could Ever Hope to Meet” (Understanding Unbalanced and Cultic Christianity and Those Attracted to It)
![]() |
| Ron Luce |
One of the most common misconceptions that people hold about cultic groups or aberrant Christianity surrounds the motives and character of those who get involved with them. The negative connotation of term of “cult,” especially concerning Bible-based groups, tends to suggest that such groups and their leadership are unpleasant people. Nothing could be further from the truth. Quite often, people get involved with groups and ministries because the leaders are often very charming and idealistic. They are impassioned individuals that seek to make a great difference in the world for the better and for God's purposes. They are usually inspiring and highly charismatic. Good, considerate, and thoughtful people who wish to make a difference in the world are attracted to these leaders, and they become the workers and followers of the organizations founded by such leaders.
I found myself thinking about this aspect of Hank Hanegraaff's comment about the Teen Mania documentary on MSNBC. He concludes his statement with the following disclaimer:
Friday, November 18, 2011
The Counter-Cult Bias Against the Anti-Cult Perspective: Hank Hanegraaff's Re-Victimization of Teen Mania Protestors and All Those Who Overcome Spiritual Abuse
One might believe that all of the groups that oppose cults might get along quite well, seeking the same end of encouraging individuals to make well-informed and reasoned choices about their religious faith. Unfortunately, there remains a great deal of controversy and conflict between the counter-cult apologetics effort within Christianity and the anti-cult effort, two related but often very different worlds. For the benefit of my secular friends who read here, the term “apologetics” (“to give an answer”) was adopted from Biblical Greek to describe the rational defense of the Christian faith. Modern day counter-cult apologists work to expose doctrinal error within the plethora of Christian belief systems, comparing any aberrant teachings to sound, sure, and clear doctrine.
Many Christians and counter-cult apologists believe that development of a strong knowledge of Scripture and doctrine provide an impervious defense against unbalanced cultic teachings and the problematic lifestyles that tend to follow them. I agree that it certainly helps. In other words, they believe that good Christians who have studied adequately are impervious to surreptitious manipulation. I was once one such person, and apparently, Hank Hanegraaff remains one. He has chosen to protest the Teen Mania documentary which aired on MSNBC on November 6, 2011 as well as the Duncans who assisted in its production. Hanegraaff's longstanding and often aggressive opposition to the anti-cult perspective dates back even further, at least until 1998 when I first heard him discuss the matter on his radio show, The Bible Answer Man.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Why Doctrinal Statements Tell You Nothing of the Unwritten Rules of a Manipulative Group
In my email correspondence with Voddie Baucham, concerning what he apparently believes to be my somewhat unfair characterization of his beliefs, he wrote:
This group seemed to think that age segregation was a biblical model never to be forsaken, and that our church was out of bounds for failing to employ this strategy. Even though I pointed out in Family Driven Faith, that I do not believe every church has to be structured this way (see p. 213).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



