In over 45 years of existence, this sect still has no Biblical eldership in place. Why is that? Answer: Because a core group of people have led the movement from the earliest days of the church, and Biblical leadership would threaten that power structure. A dynamic of largely female leadership was in place from its inception as a division from the mainstream churches when Merie was withdrawn from. (You didn’t know that Merie was withdrawn from by East San Diego Church of Christ in 1958? Oops, they conveniently leave that out of their history.)
Merie clearly preached, and I sat through many a sermon of hers. Of course, they didn’t call them that. The difference was only one of semantics. Because she sat while preaching, and waited until after a “closing prayer” for “worship service” on Sunday morning, they would call it a lesson or a Bible class. But if you can find any of those distinctions or terms in
the Bible, I’d like to see them.
I asked my mom once about the lack of elders in any of their churches, and her reply was that the bar for elders was so high because of the need for them to have a “good report within and without” even prior to their baptism. There were just not any qualified men. Really? After 45+ years?
Of course, I pointed out that the first century church had elders within just a few years, and that a “good report” had nothing to do with a person’s reputation prior to baptism. There’s not a person alive who could meet that bar for eldership, and certainly most of the apostles would not have qualified on that criteria.
Sometime later, I followed up with her on it. They had studied the subject (presumably at a May Meeting) and arrived at the same conclusion I had, that the “good report” is not referring to the time before becoming a Christian. Of course, this begs the question, did the church really have the Holy Spirit during the time they had the “wrong understanding” of that verse? That was many years ago, and there are still no elders in any of their churches, by the way.
I know they claim that teachers are in lieu of elders, but that is completely unbiblical. Why so fearful of trying things Biblically for once? I think we know the answer to that.
What was her heresy?
Merie had many disagreements with the church she came out of. Her disagreements are outlined in "The Brethren Letter," which I believe Kevin included on this site. The cornerstone of her list of grievances was payment for local preachers. She believed only traveling preachers could be compensated from the church treasury. The definition of "traveling preacher" (evangelist) has changed since Marie's time. Currently, an evangelist can be in the same congregation for over 15 years and still receive compensation from several church treasuries (the number 15 is an estimate and could be greater). Merie's other grievance was teaching on indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Her teaching referred to others who did not believe in "indwelling," but only believed in receiving guidance of the Spirit "through the word." Merie was scripturally correct on this point. Merie's further teaching launched a massive assault on the practices of masturbation and the "defiled marriage bed," defining any sexual practices by married couples other than "belly to belly, face to face." On one occasion, brethren were questioned in the Spring Valley parking lot and sent home if they admitted to "uncleanness." There are still brethren in that congregation who were personal witnesses to this. Merie realized this unilateral dismissal was unscriptural and repented of the practice. Merie's purging of all sexual practices she considered deviant lasted well beyond her death, for approximately 25 years. One congregation was completely wiped out (probably San Jose) when a number of its members were accused of having defiled marriage beds. One disfellowshipped member from a Southern California congregation (defiled marriage bed) was contacted to let him know his withdrawal was unscriptural and therefore lifted. He currently lives in Bridgeport, Texas. His wife said since his withdrawal, he has been distant, anti-social and does not trust people. He was deeply hurt by this sin against him. A common sentiment among the leadership from his congregation: "He probably wouldn't have made it anyway." Only one member attempted to contact this brother – those responsible for the unjust judgment did not seek him out for reconciliation. It was considered the righteous judgment at that time and the teachers were doing as they were told.
Actually, anonymous, that is exactly correct. But my thinking about all of this is that a church or religion has the right to conduct itself as it sees fit. At least we still have that right. That's why I mentioned the Amish. They are very comfortable, as are their children, with the judgments they have worked out over time. I don't agree with them but I love their simplicity and their fight to keep the world out of their gatherings. Who can blame them?
Perhaps it's not quite so simple, anonymous. Amish have a physical community, distinct geographical areas including dwellings and farms. They continue the tradition of Rumspringa, when children of age are required to make their own decision. Recently Amish vigilantes were arrested and sent to prison for physically humiliating their rivals. Physical abuse happened in the church, including child abuse. These things were not reported to the authorities. There is an extensive history of mental abuse, isolation and shunning, to which individuals and the church have admitted. An organization that claims the Bible and the Bible only has repeatedly inflicted punishment for which there was no scriptural basis, and for sins finessed into errors in judgment. People who rendered judgments pertaining to dozens (if not hundreds) of unscriptural withdrawals continue with impunity to this day. Tactics of intimidation and cruelty went on for years. The trail of wreckage is great; the souls of offended little ones cry out, but are they heard? These offended souls are passed off as troublemakers and complainers who just couldn't keep their mouths shut. They couldn't make the sacrifices sufficient to get to heaven. God desires mercy, not sacrifice. Go and see what that meaneth.
To Dear Anonymous who posted at 8/16 @ 3:39 PM. I read your post and it is consistent with what I know. BUT, I had never heard that "Merie realized this unilateral dismissal was unscriptural and repented of the practice." My question is, was it only the "unitlateral dismissal" part that she repented of, because I know within congregations, they continued to withdraw from people, kicking people out right & left & frequently for "corrupt mind", "uncleanness" and "defiled marriage bed" based on Merie's teaching. They used the term you are going to be "questioned" which was interrogations to see if you had a dirty mind, were unclean or had a defiled marriage bed.
Regarding the Amish, watch the movie "The Shunning" and perhaps you'll throw out your naive opinion that they are a tight little loving community. I know someone who grew up in an Amish community and he had to decide between his family and going to college. Their doctrines and commandments and traditions of men have been heaped up on top of the Bible and have suffocated the life out of the living Word of God.
Anonymous, responding to your question on the word, "unilateral," it means action of one, not "collective" action. After people were originally sent home unilaterally, the practice was discontinued but replaced with collective withdrawal for the perceived sin of "uncleanness." Sending people home from the parking lot is different from holding a formal withdrawal meeting when the congregation is present.
In the late 90's, the judgement changed in 2 ways: 1.) The Old English term "uncleanness" could not be defined as masturbation, as Merie Weiss taught erroneously for years and 2.) Masturbation could no longer be a "withdrawalable" offense because a.) the Bible does not require withdrawal for masturbation b.) masturbation is a private sin not affecting others and c.) masturbation is not a sin bringing open reproach on the church unless done in public.
A footnote on this subject: For many years, Merie and her followers taught Onan was killed by God (true) for the sin of masturbation (false) because "spilling the seed" is by definition, masturbation (false). Onan was killed by God for refusing to raise up seed to his brother (required under Mosaic law when a brother died without descendants).
This is not a defense of masturbation, but an historical account.
Got it, thanks.
I don't know the details or the merits, just that that's what she was withdrawn from for. Do you have more information than that?
The following article includes updated information about the terms of Merie's withdrawal that I didn't know at the time I posted the above comment. If anyone finds comment threads where this subject was referenced, please feel free to post this link with the updated info. Basically, Merie was withdrawn from for Sowing Discord and Division in 1958 and never admitted back into fellowship.
https://www.stantonblog.com/p/about-merie-weiss.html
It may not be true. Are you getting the info from her enemies?
No, actually the info came from someone who defended Merie. So I believe it is accurate, but if you have further information, I am happy to include it here.
I don't like the assumption that anyone who disagrees with the church's doctrines or Merie's doctrines is an "enemy." I am not saying that it is hate…but I have on more than one occasion felt flames coming my way (not in the tone of your comments here at all, by the way…thank you for that). I can assure you that hate is not what's in my heart. I believe brothers can disagree without being enemies of each other.
1 John 4:20 – Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen.
Can you go back to your source and get the details of her heresy?
Moyer Letter: Her heresy is clearly stated by her in the Moyer letter which is in the Founding Documents section of this website.
As noted in the scanned original copy of Merie's letter of withrawal, she was disfellowshipped for sowing discord & division in 1958 from East San Diego Church of Christ. I have yet to hear a coherent defense from the SCOC leadership as to why it was OK for Merie to break off and start her own sect rather than wait to "come back from withdrawal" as they demand of others.
wow the dirt digging is getting ddeeper and deeper. Wonder if yall have things yall dont want us to know about
Hmmm…well, thanks to the SCOC's tactics, they pretty much know all the bad stuff about us! Or they can dig it out of our closest family members and exaggerate it! I certainly don't have to wonder if there is anything I don't want them to know about. Thanks to counsel and public confessions, there's not much left to hide!
Good point, Seeking. Ignore Anon 9:26, he's just practicing the fear and intimidation tactics of his mentors to silence dissent.
Matthew 23:15 – Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.
how do u know its a he
Proverbs 26:4 – Don’t answer the foolish arguments of fools, or you will become as foolish as they are.
I don't know. Do you have any facts you can contribute? My point is not really to argue the merits, or lack thereof, of Merie's "withdrawal," but to provide a chronology of what led to the formation of this sect.
I believe it's important, especially when accusing a Christian, to have all the information on the accusation. Slander is a very sore evil.
Let me get this right…I was just slandered as:
1) Having sent out a bunch of emails that I didn't send
2) Starting a Facebook group I didn't start
3) Creating an evil blog that is full of lies (accused by someone who had only heard second-hand about the content of the blog, and had not read my words herself)
I have yet to have anyone point out a single lie that I've posted on these pages, and I've offered to correct any unintentional errors, yet I simply report a fact that Merie was withdrawn from for heresy and you're insinuating that I'M the one SLANDERING?
That is precious irony.
Slander is a sore evil, but Merie was withdrawn from more than once, so it's not slander, it is the truth. She also taught that homosexuals could not be saved and her doctrine was followed and taught in this sect (which was heresy and false teaching) until many years later when they decided she was wrong (or had made a mistake?) and they could be saved (guess they file that under new judgment or new understanding instead of false teaching/heresy). As far as slander goes, this sect are big on slander, character assassination and gossip, so if you're a member of this sect calling out anyone on slander I'm afraid that's hypocritical.
"I believe it's important, especially when accusing a Christian, to have all the information on the accusation. Slander is a very sore evil."
Assuming this quote came from a current Stanton Church of Christ Member, it is laughable that they would accuse anyone of slander since it is well documented that slander is one of their favorite pastimes. I spent 17 years trapped in their grasp and if there is one thing those "Christians" revel in it is talking and surmising about each other continuously.
If anyone has any information about Merie being withdrawn from more than once, or for "heresy" specifically, please let me know. The best I can tell right n now is that she was withdrawn from once in 1958 for "sowing discord and division" by East San Diego Church of Christ. She never came back into fellowship from that, to my knowledge, nor was she withdrawn from a separate time, as far as I know. But if anyone knows differently, please let me know, just so we have the facts correct on this blog.
Kevin, I remember hearing-on one of her tapes-that she was withdrawn from three times. She stated that the third time she realized the lesson God was trying to teach her was to leave the mainline churches of Christ and start another, with true believers. She said she let and never looked back, which told me that she never came back from the last withdrawal. I don't know the dates, years, etc., as she didn't say.
Hope that helps!
Okay, thanks for the info.
Here we go. Actually as I remember it the teachings have always been homosexuals could be saved i.e. a transexual Merie Weiss worked very hard to convert for many years was baptized, changed his name and resumed his natural identity.
Be careful of what you say.
Here we go? What do you mean? Unless you are willing to come forward and state your name and your history in this coc, your comment means nothing. Well, I guess it could confirm the doctrine has changed but it doesn't prove you are correct. So, who are you? And how do you know what you claim?
Furthermore, true change (repentance) only happens as Jesus convicts of sin, . Not Merie.
Nice try
Anonymous- are you currently attending? Why do your comments sound so arrogant? Is it just me? WWJD? Not be arrogant… This could be a great moment if the "christians" would do what Jesus wants them to do and disciple to people, show them love, and lead by example. You want to save people? Start putting your gospel online, where so many people spend their time these days. Start doing it with God's Love at the forefront of your mind, not your own ego.
I clearly remember the young man who came as a man, then later attended as a woman and even changed his name to a more female name. He was in the process of the "change". He did repent and stop the treatments and returned to being the man that God created him to be. I only saw and spoke to him as a man, both before and after his treatments. I remember the teaching that you can be saved if you repented of the homosexual lifestyle. Having lived in San Francisco, this was a big deal….that one would and could turn from that lifestyle (He attended in one of the southern CA congregations). I don't know if he stayed because I left several years later.
As for my history, I was "baptized" in 1977 in SF; I met and heard, first hand, Merie's teachings whenever the big meetings took place. I was very young and very hungry for the Word of God and was willing to soak in anything that appeared to be biblical. I was amazed that Merie was so willing to give up her husband for the sake of Christ because she believed her marriage to be unscriptural. Clearly she and Mr. Weiss still loved one another. That made a big impression on me…willing to sacrifice all for the sake of salvation. I eventually did as well. My family, the man I thought I would marry, my schooling (I wanted to be a nurse and become a mid-wife, but that was worldly and why would I want a profession that was so immodest….like no one in the church was not having babies!)
IF I had known that Merie had been withdrawn from, I think more bells and red flags would have come up. I had always thought she "chose" to leave the mainstream cofc because of how liberal they had become. She told me at a major meeting, and where the entire room could hear, that because I was almost 18, I needed to get out of my parents home so they could not prevent me from attending church..I was actually grounded from going because it was causing me to stay out so late and since church came first, I was to put the church before anything at home. I was in the dilemma of "being obedient/honoring" my parents and not being disobedient to God. When in fact….I was being obedient to Merie and to the whims of the church.
Funny you mention a mid-wife to be immodest. I have a sibling who thought doctors only became doctors because they wanted to see people naked (around 9yrs in 2011). REALLY? The things they put in these young minds.
I don't know if what you are saying is true but I'm glad to hear of the possibility that Merie was open at some point. Decades ago that was not the teaching in this sect and I was happy to learn they had changed their judgment some years later after Merie died. I personally heard Merie teach that "masturbators" that had "made a habit of it" had a very slim chance of being able to repent, so the other teaching they had about homosexuals (because per Merie, they could not repent and she had special understanding) was not a far stretch.
It's true.
From gihutson
FYI…..EGO….EDGING GOD OUT. So much of this conversation has EGO all over it. Not saying that I do not struggle with the ego. But before making a comment….check the ego!
Kevin,
Merie taught that YOU, the children would be the first elders of our generation. You who have not been soiled by the world and brought up unemcumbered by a past lifestyle that the world could point a finger at and cause a blemish on the church. The men who came in as adults or influenced by the world could not be "blameless".
So a lot of emphasis was put on the male children being taught at a very young age so they could carry the church as did the men of old. We could be the pillars on which they could build upon to really set the world on fire! Ironic?!?!
That is SO interesting that she taught that. Obviously that didn't work across the board of the few churches they have. Gary Preman's last talk preached the same thing. It sounded like a Nazi indoctrine to me.
So the kids grown to adults would be blameless? How ironic, when she taught that kids were unclean (enforced parents to tie childrens hands at night).
@Teresa, that's is exactly true. This is why mom was so heartbroken when I was married and baptized elsewhere. She had set her sights on me getting married within her sect and becoming part of the leadership.
But the facts don't lie…the first century church had elders very quickly, which means the elders were converts to Christianity and did not have an "unsoiled" reputation.
Any elders yet in Merie’s cult?
Nope. Even if they did have Elders, the elders would have to report to the leadership at May Week. I'm sure their "judgements" would be above the unscripturality of it all.
No elders still should be of great concern to the cult members. GP and TC to unworthy to meet the qualifications. Lol.
In proverbs 26:5 it says answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conciet and we see an example of this in Matthew 19:22 when a young man asked Christ what lack I yet and he was told to go and sell all that he has and give to the poor and the young man went away sorrowful because he had grest possessions, his behavior of being sorrowful at having to part with his possessions tells us that he was covetous not just because he had great possesions but he loved them and it was a grief to be asked to sacrafice them to God by giving them to the poor. Christ did not disrespect him but did reprove him and covetousness is an insidious evil, why do people have collections of things like baseball cards or bottle caps? It gives them a feeling of superiority over others who do not have. The more extreme covetous are called hoarders and covetousness serves ones pride, you cab tell yourself you are important because you have posssesions. Mr. Craig I read Pauls instruction to Titus in Titus 1:5 to ordain elders in every city, and Titus himself was not an elder being a young unmarried man but he was instructed to make others elders, so with your criticism of the SCOC having no elders how many elders have you ordained in your place of residence?
Mr. Anonymous, zero. Sounds like you’re giving Merie’s cult a pass on this topic. You do not see it as a concern having no deacons or elders?
Well Craig a couple of things to consider: deacons and elders are just people and though the positions are suppose to be respected many who have held those positions have tarnished them. One man , Jack Whittiker, won a very large powerball lottery and then donated a large sum to his church and the deacons and elders took that money and went out and bought themselves new turbo diesel pickup trucks, deacons and elders have been thieves of the Lords treasury time and time again. If the SCOC did have deacons and elders, and given their past histories of abuse and thefts would they be any different than any other organized religion? I don't think so, where ever there is money there are thieves trying to steal it, Judas is a prime example of someone in religious authority who was a thief. Your criticism of the SCOC lacking elders implies that you have ordained deacons and elders where you attend or that you have ordained others to the position yourself. A study of ethical principles reveals where the SCOC goes astray. The ethical principal of autonomy which states a person has the right to make their own decisions even if it is not in their own best interest, is undermined by leaders who believe they know what is right for the individual and make decisions for that person with or without the persons knowledge or consent, (and that is called parentism.) Parentism teaches the individual nothing but dependence upon a leader, and many have been abused by those trusted to be the spiritual "parents". The lack of ethical boundaries for leaders in the SCOC is the source of many abuses. There is a fine line between exhortation and coercion and only a leader well versed in ethical standards and the signs of there violations can stop the abuse before it starts. Elders and deacons are no guarantee of righteous leadership.
Anon 1:12 Certainly elders or deacons would not guarantee righteous leadership in Merie’s cult. The fact you see deacons and elders in Christ’s church is my point and one example of many of my criticism of the church of Merie. They claim to be the true church yet lack what Christ set up to be within his church deacons and elders Merie’s cult has had issues with money from their treasury being stolen in different congregations. It didn’t take elders or deacons to steal the money. Because I have criticism with this topic means I’ve ordained deacons and elders where I attend?
It is implied that when you criticize another for not doing something that you have done it yourself and know it can be done or that the criticizer is a hypocrite demanding others do what they can not or have not done, in short: if it is so easy to have deacons and elders why have you not done it yourself? Perhaps your just another armchair christian telling others what they should do to make yourself feel important in your own eyes?
Anon 8:52 You’re funny. From the beginning of commenting on this blog. Purpose has been to expose Merie’s cult. This article on elders proves Merie’s cult cannot be the one and only true church. Agree?
Anon Dec 5 at 8:52 AM: You bring up a good point, but it is full of errors.
If your statement is true, it will stand up all across the board.
If you criticize another for not doing something, and you haven't done it yourself, that makes you a hypocrite.
That statement may look good on the surface, but apply it to other things. I would not be able to criticize/judge another for having committed murder, because I myself have never killed anyone, ever. Therefore, I have no right to state that killing is wrong.
Can you see how your premise is off?
However, you are correct that I should have some sort of solid basis for my judgment. In Craig's point that Merie's group does NOT have elders, and that two of the group's mail leaders do NOT qualify to be elders, we have the right to judge. Because we have a standard, a basis, to do so-God's Word.
The church in the bible appointed Elders. Merie's group claims to be the ONE AND ONLY TRUE CHURCH, so we should be asking the question-WHY DON'T THEY HAVE ELDERS? What is wrong with this group that no one qualifies? And why do the two main leaders not qualify? All are good questions!
In my scenario above, I can judge that murder is wrong, because God's Word tells me so.
But you are correct that we do need to be careful when we judge/criticize others. God's Word does tell us to exam ourselves too. That same standard we use to judge others means we need to be applying it to our own hearts.
So, while your premise sounds good, it is not sound.
Debbie. Your spot on. To this I want to illustrate a comparison. At the same time the Stanton Churches of Christ were gaining momentum another group also was also getting it's legs out of the mainline churches of Christ. Kip McKean, a church of Christ preacher, encouraged 30 members to seperate from the church he was preaching for. These 30 were baptized 'again' with a different heart and mind to be Christians. From these 30 Kip built churches all over the world. Over 100,000 strong. The name changed from Churches of Christ, to Cross roads Churches of Christ, to a few different names for different reasons. But the point being many were baptized and converted to basically the same doctrine that we were taught. I don't agree with Kip's teachings but he was able to establish elders, deacons etc. everywhere his people were evangelizing. And they were very successful in the evangelizing. Research it on the web, it's very interesting. But I always wondered why was Kip McKean so successful with basically the same teachings as we were teaching. We, on the other hand, were knocking on doors through rain, snow, icy winds, night and day with very little results. I still really am not sure if I have the answer but it is something to ponder.
Hi Concerned. Interesting points about Kip McKean. I don't know the details but I have heard that he has renounced some of his practices, do you know more of the story? I do know that they practiced 'discipleship' which was sort of like having an assigned mentor who a convert worked closely with and possibly confessed their sins to (?); but don't quote me on that. I am also curious; was the Crossroads movement lead by women or men? I believe for all intents and purposes Stanton is/was lead by women even though they have a couple of male evangelists who are acting as elders over the whole church. PP and KS are untitled national leaders and just about every church has a female that has a strong leadership role, similar to that of an elder. Again, something to ponder.
As with other corrupt organizations.
Follow the Money. Fewer leaders means a bigger yield for their greed
Concerned, I can think of a few things that might somewhat explain the differences between the SCOC and other churches. The way the SCOC teaches (not just what they teach), it's evangelism methods, and the way they're structured and function are all different from many other places.
The way they teach has contributed to a lot of their problems. In churches without proper leadership, one of the main areas where holes show up is church discipline. From the beginning, and even present day, the SCOC has had problems with this. Sure, there can be tough judgement calls and situations that are hard to discern for any church. But the SCOC goes way overboard with a lot of it. The unscriptural withdrawals, fear and intimidation, public rebukes based on assumptions or inaccurate info, unwritten rules that people don't learn about until they get punished for it. This blog details most of it already, revealing how people have been treated. They end up losing good people and even good kids who might have been converted, but instead go somewhere else or denounce God altogether because they don't want be treated the same way.
The way they evangelize is also a problem. Not that it's wrong to knock on doors, but many churches do other things along with knocking on doors. For example other churches take out ads in local papers, ads online, or have a website, and they do things in the community which alone brings in many members. Just knocking on doors by itself is too inefficient isn't going to cut it anymore nowadays. Especially today when so many people are more aware of abusive churches and cults than before, many would like to know what they are getting into first. I can't be the only one who went out on personal work and had lots of people ask "Do you have a website?", and after we tell them no, watch their face twist with confusion. Then it was no surprise (at least to me anyway) that they wouldn't show up to non-member class even if they sounded good at the door.
Many have been severely hurt and traumatized in different places and would like to see a website or something before they get involved with random groups inviting them to a bible class (and I know the internet wasn't a factor in the 70's and 80's, but it has been for the last 15 or so years). The SCOC leaders have taught and said on tapes that having a website is against "their interests", whatever that means. Like Debby's point, if you are a leader and you truly believe you are the ONLY place in the entire WORLD that has the truth, wouldn't it stand to reason that you should be doing everything you could to get the truth out? The SCOC instead makes their teachings exclusive VIP access only and hides it from the world. Other churches grow because they put themselves out there more.
Their structure and functions are different too. Many churches have various dedicated ministries and community outreach programs. Simple things like helping to feed the homeless can draw in many visitors to the point where those churches don't even need to knock on doors. Just having people see you doing something good as a christian or together as a church helps get them interested in attending more so than just showing up at their door randomly. Members are more active and are a more meaningful part of their church when helping others and have something more to look forward to other than just sharing or listening in a bible class. In healthy churches their schedules don't keep people busy just for the sake of busyness. The SCOC tries their best with what they have, don't get me wrong, however there are just so many things that can be done better to where they can grow 10x faster very easily. Though like most have already experienced and can also see from this blog, they have been reluctant to change anything. Instead of self-reflection they just blame it all on the world being bad when even today other places are still growing and adapting.
I always wondered why they didn’t do anything for homeless or those in need other than their own congregation. We just had a dinner for anyone that would attend for our Christmas musical and free dinner and gifts for the children all provided by the congregation . We had 200 attend many were single parents. We have a program where someone can take a tab and donate an food item for 11 months out of the year to be distributed to various places. We happen to choose paper towels for a local low income school so furnish 12 rolls each month. We have been blessed by God and so willing to share. I still never understood the no holiday thing. Never would have been my kind of church. That is because it is a cult.
Great summary of some of the issues in the SCOC, AFP. I personally hope they continue to keep doing the same thing and just implode. I hope people leave there, realizing that they can find God elsewhere. Merie poisoned that tree long ago and in my opinion, while there is certainly hope for the people, it does not lie in Merie's cult. There are way too many wrong things with it, and your list is a simple start. I can't see how one can truly love as Christ there and be around all that oppression, self-righteousness, and flat-out unkindness (in a respecter of persons kind of way, because we all know they can be kind to certain people).
First, they need to clean up their own back yards before they try to convert anybody. As it is, before anybody it told what they have ahead of them in the changes they need to make, they really need to know the treatment that they have a good chance of experiencing. In many cases too many leaders are just downright cruel and unloving. Look how many of them have been withdrawn from and/or sat down for a lack of love and/or oppression, which stems from a lack of love. Anyway, how is it that a "Christian", which means "Christ like", who taught about love, can have a lack of love in their hearts and especially to the children of God?
I have called to task some of these about this situation and not one of them could answer it.
36-40 Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Yes, we all know these scriptures, but it seems that it is rampant in the churches that not much credence is given to this, yes, it is taught, but how much is really followed? You can't give to the homeless and/or presents to children when the flock is being ignored and/or mistreated. This may be why this church has not grown like it did in the early 1900's. Also, there are groups out there who call themselves Church of Christ and not worship in church buildings. Here is one right here-
http://www.tacomachurch.com/who.html
http://www.tacomachurch.com/what.html
I have been in contact with them.
And I have seen others. Meeting in wherever they can.
We taught the non-members what Jesus told the widow at the well and it applies to the church as well, that God searches for those who would worship him spirit and in truth. All of what the church is doing to its' members is NOT either of those.
To clarify, the examples given weren't meant to be solutions but simply showing what other churches do to that helps them grow compared to the SCOC in response to Concerned's comment. Obviously feeding the homeless or giving out presents isn't going to fix all of their problems, nor is any church required to do these things in order to be right with God. Like Lynn says, their problems have more to do with a lack of love and no promotion or gift giving will fix their hearts.
That's also another great point to bring up about people who are doing home worship as I don't think many people know about it. For those who don't know, more and more people are giving up on institutional churches and worshiping at home with their families or a handful of other believers. While it's great people are recognizing some of the evil and false churches out there, a word of warning:
Some of these "home worship" groups aren't all what they claim either in some cases. A few have been ousted from their former churches for sin and/or causing trouble or divisions. Some may simply be trying to build their own followings (sounding familiar?). I'm sure this already goes without saying as many here have learned our lessons in being too trusting, but please make sure any group you get involved with has the proper heart towards God.
That being said though people should research these groups, there are a lot of interesting stories from the ones trying this.
One preacher, GT, back east, stayed local for an ailing father and did home worship. We know this was true in some fashion for the church during the dark ages as some were still walking in white. When there is no other way, God will make it possible for those seeking to worship him in truth.
Just a few other outreach ideas our church has done in the past are coat and or back pack drives for low income schools,making rooms available in our church for Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts and AA, fields free for sporting events,vacation bible school in the summer, several different days or times for bible studies such as women’s,couples, all ages,etc. now you ask why have these various activities? It shows how we are reaching out into the community that we are here and a friendly church. We have gained many new members or attendees as a result. We also have a Giving Closet where volunteers work sorting clothing. And household goods for those in need and our bible study had a volunteer gift card drive to send to Chico California where they had the fires. Our small group sent over $200 in gift cards just to mention another small sacrifice helping others. We also have had free concerts that bring people into the church and many use our church for memorials and funerals or weddings. All of this can result in new members. No knocking on doors which I would think would be the least productive and waste of time. Especially if you have no website so the person invited could do research. However, you could refer them to this blog.
Oh, I know that Lynn. I'm not saying home worship is bad or that it's anything new, people have been doing it for a long time. Was just mentioning how more and more people are doing it now. It also felt important to mention that some of those groups are just as oppressive and dangerous as these other cults out there and for people to simply be careful when joining them just like you would any church.
Also thank you anon 6:41 and Jo 8:12 for sharing you experiences. Those are great examples.
oops *your*
Advocate for Peace: those who invite and teach the nonmember are being disingenuous. Before someone is baptized to become a member of Merie’s cult they should be told what they are getting into. Though I only got wet at baptism and it thankfully was null and voided by our God if I’d been told what they were about I’d never of gave them a sniff of my time. Knocking on doors is wasted time. I agree if they were all what they say they are get the word out in a more efficient way.
I actually had that point in my initial comment but it was over the character limit so I had to shorten it and cut that part out.
But yes, their recruitment method is dishonest and what is presented at the doors and in non-member classes isn't the full picture of what they expect from members. People don't learn everything until they have been in for awhile. The way other churches teach non-members is different too and they don't hide things they think people aren't "ready for" like the SCOC does.
I've been wanting to make a post about elders for awhile now and mainly wanted to comment on what the SCOC teaches about it. One of the main reasons the SCOC doesn't have true elders is simply a lack of understanding about the qualifications. Even if it is true that they might lack qualified men, there is no excuse for the men to stay that way and not strive to BECOME elders. Some of the men say that they themselves can never be elders and have already disqualified themselves and won't bother to strive to become elders or properly teach others because of poor understanding. Here is why they say these things: KJV Titus 1:6 "If any be blameless, husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly."
From what I remember they get all three of the things mentioned here wrong. We had multiple classes on the qualifications years ago, and they basically taught that "faithful children" meant "converted children". I don't believe this to be correct. Parents cannot force or command their children to be converted. That is a personal choice that people have to make for themselves and their own soul. What disqualifies a man is a child that is openly rebellious and disobedient towards you as a parent, not directly to God. Basing it off conversion alone is a huge problem and automatically disqualifies almost everybody. The focus of appointing an elder is supposed to be on the character of the man (1 Timothy 3:2-3, Titus 1:7-8) and his ability to lead (1 Timothy 3:4-5, Titus 1:9, 1 Peter 5:1-3). There are plenty of men in other churches who are wonderful elders even though not all their children are Christians. It's still possible for adult children to not be "riotous or unruly" even if they aren't converted.
I also feel they are wrong about what "blameless" means. They think this means you must have a spotless reputation and can't be accused of ever having committed any serious sins. They still have unrealistic expectations (some members already admitted this) and are basically looking for the "perfect" man. They are going to be waiting forever because there is no perfect man. Being blameless means there is CURRENTLY nothing in your life you can be openly accused of and have shown a consistent pattern of good works mentioned in Titus 1 and 1 Timothy 3. Why would you hold a man's past against him when even God doesn't and forgives? I would trust a man who humbled himself and overcame his sins a lot more than a man who was thought of as "perfect". Not only that but a man who has experience with overcoming certain sins would be a great asset to the ministry and could help others with the same struggles. Being part of the ministry gives members a worthy purpose and helps them learn and grow, and could be the very thing that saves someones soul. It doesn't make sense to hold a man down forever just because you have a low opinion of his past that he's already repented of.
The last one that I think is wrong is "husband of one wife". If I remember right they taught this meant you could only be married once in your lifetime. It's better to just keep this one simple and say that a man must be faithful to his wife according to 1 Corinthians 7. Saying that a man who wants to be an elder can't get re-married contradicts the verses that say re-marriage is allowed under certain circumstances (death or adultery). Again, why hold it against a man who re-marries scripturally when even God doesn't and allows it? The focus should be about the character of the man being appointed and a scriptural re-marriage is neither a sin or a character flaw that would effect him being an elder. If he is doing his best as a husband and father and meets the qualifications then there shouldn't be an issue.
I'm sure there's a lot more than this, but these are some of the main points I remember being taught. If I missed anything or got something wrong, please feel free to add or correct anything.
That was me above forgot to edit name.
Advocate for Peace, your comment make sense and is so simple. Merie’s cult brings so much confusion with topics such as elders. Scripture talks about the simplicity of God’s word. How often do cult member specifically leaders of the cult cause difficulties and confusion? I’d say often. Proof they do not have the Holy Spirit.
I agree, Craig, well done, Advocate for Peace. Stanton's problem is they don't know enough about history, and so they neglected to put in place the checks and balances which is necessary for good government, as America's Founders did. A key part of checks and balances is elders. Right now, we have autonomous church leaders making frequently tyrannical decisions, and there is zero oversight. And so the entire church is tainted with the actions of rogue leaders with arbitrary standards of right and wrong, playing God. It's very sad. Another reason why I admire America's Founders far more than the leaders of Stanton today. Politics and religion have quite a bit in common, contrary to what Stanton has always taught. While they sit in their bubbles, as the world gets progressively worse, losing their children to the Marxist schools and media constantly, yet refusing to fight, there are those of us who refuse to sit on the sidelines, and who understand that Christianity was fundamental to the Founding of this country, and it is Christians duty to uphold it as well. If one is supposed to provide for and protect one's family, which are commands from scripture, then one certainly ought to protect and be involved in one's countries politics. While Christians are on the sidelines, we have unscrupulous charlatans running wild, unchecked. What is the point of having the First Amendment, when Christians are too cowardly to get up and speak at City Council meetings and School Board meetings?
Agree on Qualified Men, Advocate for Peace. No one is perfect, and as they wait for the perfect man to step forward the church is dying for a lack of elders.
Having faithful children baptized is incomprehensible. Samuel and David had disobedient children, and often spectacularly disobedient, as was the case of Absalom, yet that didn't disqualify them from leadership. I'm pretty sure the distinction is if you give your kids good values and a good upbringing, that is your responsibility, but what they do beyond 18 is their own choice. There have been children with horrific childhoods who made right choices.
Agree completely on blameless as well. Exactly how can Peter be called blameless when he denied Christ 52 days ago, yet converted 3,000 souls in Acts 2? He can't. But under Stanton's rules, that would have been impossible. Peter would have had to sit down for at least 10 years and learn about his heart and 'shame'. I heard one preacher say the only time the church will be pure is when there is no humans in it. Quite true, IMHO.
Also, to the Husband of one wife, it seems to me, and I agree with you, that it refers to simply being the husband of one wife. Whether one was divorced because one's wife was an adulteress, or whether one is widowed and remarried seems to be highly immaterial. In an era where sexual fidelity (virginity) before marriage is extremely rare, (tragically), it's wise to go to the common sense understandings and to stop putting Pharisaic burdens on people. It's pretty crazy that we have a nation where they can't study pornography because they can't find a control group of men who haven't used it, and Stanton is concerned about how many times the bread is broken in the Lord's Supper, and they are bothering if a man has been widowed or remarried due to a wife's adultery in order to be an elder. Absolutely mind blowing. Pharisees gonna Pharisee. Let's also not forget that they spent 4 hours bothering about whether a man can take a Big Mac into the building when he's doing work on the building at a May Trip in the last 2 decades. When one member had the effrontery to suggest they were straining at gnats and no one ought to give two hoots about someone having a Whopper at the building while doing work on it on a Saturday, not even during regularly scheduled church times, he was promptly lynched, and has never been heard from since 2006. Have to be careful of the Piranhas. Of course, we were told this man was 'proud', and needed to work on his pride. Yup, if you disagree with any teacher in Stanton, you are nearly always 'proud'. It's impossible to be 'umble' and to have an opinion that is not aligned with a Stanton teacher. But the teachers will teach constantly on being 'umble and meek, and to not be like Korah and to question authority. They remind you that the earth swallowed him up. From personal experience, one should heed that, because even if you disagree with the teachers and the earth doesn't swallow you, you'll soon be swallowed up in your own reflections due to being severed from all contact with Stanton. If you don't turn to God anxiously and passionately, you are utterly doomed. When you perish, Stanton will gravely decree 'ere wuz a proud bruther'.
Excellent post, Advocate for Peace, Stanton can't get checks and balances, and Elders fast enough, IM 'umble opinion.
And BTW, am I the only person who is asked five times to click on boxes to identify I am not a bot? Quite irritating and time consuming.
Uriah, you only have to click on boxes if you are using anything but ur real name! And it's a nuisance, but a necessary one! 🙂
Thank you Debby. How does it know if one is using one's real name or not? Initially, I didn't encounter boxes at all, but recently, I've been getting five consecutive different boxes of 'Would you be so good as to click on all the fire hydrants, the traffic lights, the cars, the store fronts, the bus's, etc, etc'. And when I have more than one comment because it's so long it can't fit into one comment, it's enough to give me heart palpitations. On one occasion, it had 8 different boxes, and I was beginning to fear I was going to be here all night doing kids games just to post a comment:). Thankfully it was accepted, but it was a close call:). All I wanted to do was post a comment, not find the fire hydrants, for the love of all that's good. I know it's to find bots, but apparently, the system is trying to tell me, rather strongly, that it suspects I am a bot. I shall try to be 'umble, and maybe it won't 'umble me so much:).
You just have to sign in with an email before you post to skip all the captcha boxes. Plus it lets you edit or delete your comments when you're logged in. That's why I've started using mine, those captcha's annoy me too.
Also thanks for the compliments and for expanding on the topic, those were good points as well. I wanted to post a lot more on elders but it doesn't seem necessary since the other issues are minor compared to the scriptural understandings they give.
The "converted children" teaching I mentioned is a national teaching since I've heard different men disqualify themselves because of it, including GP. One of the main reasons he says he can't be an elder is because of that as I'm sure others have heard him say.
The "blameless" teaching is a national teaching as I've heard others admit to having the standards a bit too high for appointing elders. If you scroll up and read Kevin's article he mentions that even his mom Freda, who's been a member since the beginning, admits the bar is set too high.
The "husband of one wife" is one I'm not too sure about. There's still some confusion on this one and I doubt it's a national teaching. It's possible what I heard only came directly from the minds of the teachers I got it from and not the leaders. The SCOC has changed so much of it's teachings on marriage in general that it's hard to keep up. This may have been changed already but either way, it's pretty straightforward. The focus should be on the behavior of the man as a husband and father, not how many times he's been married. If the marriage or re-marriage is scriptural then just leave it alone.
Another thing about all this is that MEMBERS ACTUALLY WANT ELDERS! It has been a topic that has been brought up over and over and over again, going all the way back to when Merie was still alive. Even last year's may week (or the year before, I forget) it was said there were still many questions about it.
It might be wise for them to fix their leadership issues first before addressing all these minor issues that come up in their may week meetings. Why spend thousands of dollars flying people out from all over the country just to spend hours discussing topics that could be solved by simple common sense? (not all issues brought up are minor, but most are) Why keep ignoring the weightier matters that everyone has concerns about? People are tired of the "main teacher" system they got going on and want to follow scripture but the leaders are holding others back, and it doesn't look like anything is going to change anytime soon sadly. I mean what else is there to say? Might just be time to move on just as others have.
Uriah Heep, excellent points. I’m not clicking on boxes. The point with Peter is perfect. Imagine if Peter denied GP? Wow!! Or if Peter asked GP how much his support was? Wow wow. What if Peter asked GP why he hasn’t visited the troubled Portland congregation for nearly a decade though Portland supports the fraudulent evangelist? What if Peter read this blog and GP found out? Well Peter would be withdrawn from.
Whew, pardon me while wiping the perspiration off my face. That last comment required 9 box's. You can imagine the consternation on my face. My eyes slowly glazed over, and then began to indignantly bulge out of my head as I saw a fresh box present itself. I've seen about all the fire hydrants and traffic lights I care to see for a lifetime, if the bot monitor cares to know.
Thank you, Craig. You must not be getting any boxes because I'm getting all yours. LOL. Thank you!! You can keep the Boxes. I know it's the season for sharing, and caring is sharing, but you can be a Grinch and that's just fine with me:).
Yes, if Peter denied GP, he'd be withdrawn from, minimum 3 years for him to work on his pride, and learn some 'umility. Oh, yes, Craig, lol, you are so right. No asking about the 'evangelists' support, or questioning where the traveling is to. That is 'murmering' and 'sowing seeds of discord' definitely, and is the very behavior Korah was punished for. And if anyone doesn't know that, jes' ask your teacher in Stanton. Act like you know, Rico! LOL. Whoo boy, this is too much.
Yes, if Peter knew what was good for him, he'd stay well away from this blog. If not, it would be curtains for him. He'd be in trouble for askin' questions, and gettin' uppity. Can't have 'uppity' people in Stanton. Not good for keepin' people in their place. Tends to end up in nasty sessions where, HORRORS, the Stanton teachers are asked legitimate questions by everyone.
Uriah Heep, what is a red haired little dreeb like you doing in a place like this?
Bein' 'umble, as I always am, Concerned. I am a very 'umble man, and have much to be 'umble about. You have seen the film version of 'David Copperfield'.
Uriah Heep, funny!
Straining at gnats; majoring in the minors; worrying about motes in their eyes; letter of the law over the spirit of the law. It's all legalism without grace, and the abundant lack of love, lack of compassion, lack of sympathy, lack of empathy, and just an overall lack of humanity should be enough to show anyone seeking that this cult is a dead-end trap.
That's a good summary Anonymous.
Anon- AMEN!
My current pastor said “He is in a jail cell, but the door is wide open.”
Referring to my husband. My husband’s response : “That sounds about right.”
Who else is glad to be starting 2019 away from the Cult of Merie Weiss??!! I know I am! Here's to you and a wonderful and free-to-make-your-own-decisions filled year!
Anonymous Jan.1- I AM! It’s called LIBERTY! And I am so thankful to God for that Liberty!
It is very sad that those within the cult do not have the liberty to do as Jesus would do.
My husband and I recently went to Sam’s Club, and ran into a current cult follower. I said a big “Hello TB!” And was met with total rejection. She focused on my husband as he is still attending. And I thought this was the ‘season to be Jolly’!
Keep praying for their chains to be loosed!
Anon 2:08 I’m thrilled to be entering my second year free from the oppressive cult. Though i’d love to make contact with the fearful leaders and see if they’d answer my multitude of questions. Funny Donna as I’ve had a couple encounters with cult members since I stopped attending their fruitless assemblies. Both encounters I was met with rudeness. I let the first cult member know by a message. The second couple would’ve been told face to face they were rude. Though as I searched for them I could not find them. I’m amazed how they can be your so called friend/brethren and do a complete turn the other direction on you because you stop attending. True lack of love within the cult. GP, TC, KS and PP you all are doing a horrible job as leaders. You all are simply pathetic.
While on the other hand when I run into them they visit with me as if everything is normal. It is very difficult to keep my mouth shut and not ask “why do you shun my son?” This is a new year and I think it is a good year to ask? I would like to hear their answer but bet dollars to donuts they will not answer me. Happy New Year!
That is because you are a withdrawn from member, Craig. Christians are commanded by scripture/God to mark and avoid and so they have marked and now will avoid you as long as you are withdrawn from. Those are the rules of engagement.
They won’t answer because they are cowards. Please Concerned, no Christians in that cult for starters. I’m not withdrawn from He who matters. God does not recognize the fraudulent practices of those heathens and jokesters. So you have mark and avoid the same as withdrawal? I agree. You’re marked and avoided are you not? But the cultsters have the understanding wrong. The practices of the cult are their own rules of engagement. Their understanding on withdrawal is off. Kevin has it correct. I’ll never recognize it as for one I’m not nor ever been a member of Merie’s evil cult.
I'm not talking about your rules of engagement I am talking about theirs.
Craig, Concerned is correct. The members you have encountered aren't speaking to you because if they do, they too will be withdrawn from. So fear keeps them from even saying hello!
I remember when Dianne first left the group and sent out emails to different individuals. The leaders in the group threatened withdrawal to any member who read those emails! The leaders use withdrawal as a tool to keep people from hearing things that might take them away from the group.
On the surface, this can SEEM like a good thing. To "protect" the group. But when you think about it, you realize it's also to keep ones from hearing the truth.
It's the patronizing attitude that "we know what's best for you", instead of letting ones hear it and decide for themselves.
The leaders of the group don't feel they need to explain themselves. They believe that everyone should just do as they are told, and believe as they are told.
I know this because I was told this by the main leader himself. He said we don't explain ourselves. In May meetings, listen to the tapes-you will hear them say they want to restrict cell phones, etc because of the different judgments being made in different congregations. And instead of explaining why the differences, they make more rules restricting communication.
Sound familiar? Kind of like communism? Where the leaders "know what's best for the common folks"?
When I first left the group, I did feel as though I had left a communistic country. No more big brother watching me, listening in to my conversations (at fellowships, etc), no one to answer to but God!
Your situation is a difficult one, Craig. they have effectively taken away your ability to communicate directly with members still within the group. However, there are other ways and you will find them!
I do know that the leaders in the group read this blog, or they used to anyway. Some of the things I have said on here got back to my ex-teacher, and he sent word that he "wanted to talk with me". Not make a confession, but to talk. I declined, because this teacher has a reputation for misunderstanding what you have said, and he runs with it. And I do mean "run"! He listens with his emotions instead of making sure he understands what you are saying. He does zero fact checking-even with his sermons. One sermon he gave was on being a Pessimist but he spelled it "Pestimist", and said "the root word is Pest" and then based his whole sermon on what a "pest" a pessimist is!
My point is that even for his sermons he couldn't be bothered to fact check the spelling in the dictionary.
I also know that there are members that are reading this blog, who want to leave but feel they cannot. So don't give up Craig!
I had no idea my family was involved in such a dysfunctional church? And found out since Craig has left it is a cult. Thankfully Craig and his family were always close to his dad and I. Now I know why the kids liked coming over here because they had more freedom much more. Looking back I know they always stayed on such a strict schedule not bending away from it. To see how the family dynamics have changed in the past two years is unbelievable. The poor people left behind….so sad still going through that ridiculous schedule and not living! God is everywhere..and He loves you..walk out and see Him. He is not in that cult. Ever wonder why the young adults age 18 leave? Some will make it and unfortunately some will not…they need our sincere prayers daily…….it is difficult for me to understand why people stay as if they have drank the koolaid but I pray none of them go back…..it is a prison. Just like some people that get out of prison mess up again deliberately so they can go back because life gets too hard for them and there they have a routine and decisions are made for them……thanks for your comments that help me understand
I truly am so glad to be out of the clutches of Merie's group. I left in 2017 and it was tough for a while. 2018 was better. Much better. And I am hoping this year continues on that path. Life gives us enough challenges as it is. Being around oppressive and unkind people make this life much more difficult. I hope those of you considering leaving will take that risk, find YOURSELF and who you were meant to be, who God made you to become, and live a fulfilling life. It really does get better over time. Don't waste any more years doing the bidding of others. You think there aren't people in Merie's cult, in their old age, who know they're stuck but it's too late? I've seen it in the eyes, the comments, of some. They have lost children, spouses, family, love. But they think it's too late and where would they go now? They must stick to what they believe because that's what they spent their entire lives fighting for. That doesn't have to be you. Don't let it be you. You still have a chance to live a good life. And if you want, you really can find God outside of that group. Don't let them take that hope from you too.
Happy new year, people. Let's make the best of it!
Concerned, I understand how they operate. Unscriptural withdrawals they seem to have mastered. I’ve seen comments how they are applying mark and avoid to those who simply leave the cult. That is pure evil. They continue to disturb the family structure. GP, TC, PP, KS and all you so called preachers and teachers. You all will be held accountable for your evil doings.
The members who stay in the cult are obviously scared and ignorant. Their lives have been taken over and their minds no longer function. The oppression became part of their lives, almost sadomasochistic. Their sufferings and mental degradation has placed them in captivity. "Like a dog that's been beat too much, They spend their lives just covering up" (Thanks Mr Springsteen) Making excuses for their non-Christian beliefs is what they have come to do, to make their lives have meaning. Complete ignorance to what the truth is for over 30 years, allowing greedy leaders to take their lives and families away. They are no longer sacrificing, but believe they are fulfilling a dream. In the end as the cult dies they will find themselves completely alone as their dream disappears and reality shows them how they have wasted their lives and inflicted pain on those who they used consider friends and family. Divorcing the wife I had who still is in that cult over 30 years, released me from being dragged down to be a $ervant of the cult. Although these cult leaders have been clear from the start that they, believed me to be some sort of "worldly" sinner, they continue to collect their monies from my salary through the deceit of my then wife.
Her income now is still coming from my over 35 years of service to the USA. But the money means more to them than the concern about where it comes from, or whether they receive their monies as offerings or actual demands.
Charlatans, thieves, deceivers, liars, abusers, and the list goes on, these cult leaders are part of the destruction of society that is occurring.
Ignorant people are being enslaved. Ignorant followers have no future in the dying cult. Ignorant Christians have been fooled for centuries by one cult or another.
Notice how they hide from the world and fear that to live any other lifestyle would make their cult dissolve leaving them lost for the rest of their lives.
Debby, I understand they are being told not to speak to me because of the unscriptural withdrawal. I was told by one that MM instructed this. Yet the members knew as I sat among them for nearly the last five months I was doing so as a nonmember. Actually on some other occasions the hello’s and even handshakes I’ve received. Plus I’ve been told that different ones from their cult meetings have said hello to me as well. Go figure. I’ll continue to engage every cult member I cross paths with. I’ll let them know what they are involved in as well. I do remember a lot of craziness with the Dianne, her husband and the Des Moines fiasco. Everything we were told they were trying to introduce. Makes me wonder what was true and what was not with what the Portland cult was being told. GP is a master threat maker for sure. Yet to much of a coward to answer questions. He knows many are seeing right through the teachings of the cult that he is leading. So much easier to say he won’t give an answer. Coward!
Just something I found that's hilarious.
https://babylonbee.com/news/kjv-only-pastor-tests-positive-for-niv