This blog article will be different from many of my other reviews in that I am assuming that the reader has already seen the series. Therefore, I won’t be giving a detailed review. Although I will give commentary about certain things in the series, my goal is to focus on a response based on answering the questions of “how did this happen”, and “where do we go from here?” Here are my scattered thoughts.
What Could Possibly Go Wrong? Imagine this scenario; a man who has never even pastored in a local church acquires pope-like influence in hundreds, if not thousands of churches across the country for decades. Sound crazy? What about this same man, who has never been married, writing books on marriage and hosting sold out marriage conferences all over? Seem a little far-fetched? Ok, ok, what about this same man, who has never had any children, writing books on parenting and hosting sold out family conferences everywhere? Not to mention building a homeschool empire that would amass millions of dollars. I mean, what could possibly go wrong? Enter Bill Gothard.
“Security” Over Freedom. I was saved and discipled in an IFB church. I first became acquainted with Bill Gothard around 15 years ago, but not in the way that you might think. There was a family singing group passing through our area. Our pastor, having heard of the group, asked them to come and sing for us during a Sunday evening service. After the service was over the mother of the group began passing out Bill Gothard’s material to some of the ladies in our church. When this news got back to my pastor he went around and gathered up all of the materials that had been passed out and threw them in the garbage can (thank God for my pastor). Needless to say, that singing group never set foot in our church again.
I learned two things that day, my pastor had a disdain for Gothard, and Gothard was a man of great influence. The question is how? How could a man rise to such fame and influence in an arena in which he didn’t have enough credentials to work in the concession stand? I believe that the answer to that question can be found in one word, security.
Gothard rose to prominence in the middle of the sexual revolution of the 60’s and 70’s. The church was engrossed in a culture war that it was clearly losing. Societal norms like the nuclear family and the marital confines of sex were under a full scale assault. Illicit drugs were making their way across the border at an unprecedented rate. Rock and roll music was taking the youth by storm. Parents were afraid for their children. Grandparents were afraid for their grandchildren. Pastors were afraid for their churches. And in walks this soft spoken, polished man who seemed to have all of the answers.
These answers came in the form of rules. There were rules for dress, rules for hair styles, rules for authority, rules for finances, rules for business practices, rules for marriage, rules for having children, rules, rules rules. The overarching message was clear, do what Gothard says and everything will be alright. God will bless you and your children will turn out right. Do this and God will do that. Gothard often spoke about what he called, “Staying under the umbrella of God’s protection” through the keeping of these rules. It reminds me of Grug from the movie “The Croods” saying, “the rules keep us alive! Never not be afraid!”
It’s important to understand that this comes from an old playbook; the fear of the masses leading to control of the masses. We see this in Amish culture (the world is so evil that we must isolate ourselves from it and we will be ok). It’s definitely in Mormon culture where I live and pastor (the church and the bible have been corrupted but we can trust our church leaders and their ordinances). We also see it in communist countries (life is hard and scary but we can trust our government to take care of us). Sadly, we even see it within certain sects of the “Christian” church (we might be saved by grace, but we have to earn God’s blessing and protection by keeping the rules).
I am continually amazed at the tendency of the human spirit to be inclined to choose supposed security over freedom. I recently read a book by Yeonmi Park entitled In Order to Live. Yeonmi was born and raised in the tyranny of North Korea where she faced unspeakable oppression from the communists. As a teenager she managed to escape to China, only to be kidnapped by sex traffickers. After two years in that horrible situation she was able to escape and finally make it to South Korea. She was granted citizenship and for the first time in her life experienced the taste of true freedom. She could do whatever she wanted, get a job, go to college, get married, etc. However, Yeonmi wasn’t used to this freedom at all. She recognized that she would be responsible for her choices and the ensuing consequences. At times the freedom of choice became so burdensome that Yeonmi stated, “some days I actually wished that I had a dictator to make all of those choices for me.” In the world of American Evangelicalism, Bill Gothard gladly volunteered for the position. However, born again Christians know that both freedom and security come through the gospel of Christ.
Fundamentalist or No? Language is always evolving. There are certain words that mean something totally different than they did even a hundred years ago. One of these words is “fundamentalist” (as it pertains to Christians). A hundred years ago, a fundamentalist was simply a person who believed the fundamentals of the Christian faith. By that definition I am a glad fundamentalist. But that’s not what the word means anymore, it just doesn’t. Today the word “fundamentalist” refers to a crazy, cultic sect of Christianity. It’s now seen in the same way as fundamentalist Muslims who strap bombs to their chest, or fundamentalist Mormons who practice polygamy. The question is, do we continue to fight for and use this word to describe Bible believing Christians or do we just let it go? One thing is for sure, the producers of SHP tried their best to lump all of us together (more on this later).
Let’s just pretend for the sake of argument that we have let that word go. It now means a crazy cult. What makes fundamentalism a cult? Why do so many cults seem to share so many similarities? I believe that the same type of recipes make the same type of cake. Let’s look at this cultic recipe.
Unquestioned Leadership. In the cult 101 handbook, page 1 (I am being facetious), you will find that without a cult leader(s), you can’t be a true cult. In order for someone to rise to the level of cult leader they have to rise above any external standard. In other words, there can be no standard higher than themselves. In Mormonism, the modern day “apostles” supposedly get messages straight from God. This cannot be vetted, therefore they cannot be questioned. And because God is always progressing it doesn’t even matter if they contradict other Mormon apostles of the past (check). Jehovah’s witnesses are not allowed to read and interpret the bible or any Christian literature on their own. They have to have one of their leaders interpret it for them (check). Let’s be honest. How many of us have sat in a Baptist church and heard a Baptist pastor say things like, “The Lord told me”, or “the Lord laid this message on my heart”, or “the Lord gave me this message.” I was guilty of this as a young preacher. I was parroting what I had heard. However, as someone who pastors in a culture full of mysticism and subjective truth, I am pleading for it to stop. If we can’t simply say, “the Word of God says” then we need to stop preaching.
What’s interesting about Gothard’s case is that he wasn’t even a preacher per se. He certainly wasn’t a pastor, and yet his para-church organization (IBLP) had an unbelievable influence upon so many churches. It makes me wonder where all of the pastors were and what they were doing at the time. On a personal level, this is something that has always disturbed me about the Duggars. There have been extended periods of time over the years in which they did not belong to a local church. Instead they would have "family church" and listen to messages by Gothard. This is a huge red flag for me.
Another thing about Gothard (and we have to get this) is that while he didn’t use any extra biblical revelation like Joseph Smith, he butchered the Bible so badly that ultimately Gothard’s own thoughts were the standard. This is known as eisegesis, where a person comes up with their own ideas and tries to cram those ideas into Scripture. There are pulpits all over the country where this takes place every week. When this happens, the Word of God isn’t the standard, the preacher is. True biblical interpretation comes through exegesis, where the preacher pulls the meaning from the text, in context with authorial intent. This is why I am a huge proponent of expository preaching over purely topical. But that is another blog for another day.
Here is the crazy thing about cultic evangelicals. They would never admit that a man is above the Word of God, and yet many buy into the mindset that the MOG (Man of God) would never do anything wrong and cannot be questioned. I recently read a report about a pastor/Christian School principal who had sexually abused a teenage girl for over a year. During school hours he would have this girl come alone into his office for “counseling”, and shut the door. He also had his secretary who was just outside the door turn on a white noise machine to drown out any noise coming from his office (are you kidding me). Not only that but this man also bought this girl a cell phone that everyone knew about. The staff knew something wasn’t right, but they felt guilty for questioning the MOG. This is occult 101. The FBI often uses the code DLR (Doesn’t Look Right). When you see a preacher or pastor commit a DLR, in the name of all that’s good and decent, ask questions, speak up. Any man who isn’t willing to clear up a misunderstanding is a snake in the grass. (See Wolves Among Lambs by Stacey Shiflett)
A Playground for Predators. In all my years of pastoring I have never come across a true blue cult that didn’t have sexual predators in it, not once. I think there are some factors that contribute to this. First, once a group of people have placed a leader(s) above God’s word then they are at the mercy of that person. And if that person has intentionally placed themselves in that position of power, then we already know everything that we need to know about their character.
The second major factor has to do with boundaries. As a father of three (two of them being girls) I am intensely aware of the fact that one of my greatest responsibilities as a parent is to instill within them a sense of healthy and appropriate boundaries. Wolves can sense a weakness in the boundary line and will exploit them given an opportunity.
In a culture like IBLP the system is designed for the exact opposite to take place. Instead of healthy boundaries being built up, they are actually being torn down. When young women and girls (and boys for that matter) are so browbeat about everything, they lose their sense of value and worth, as well as personal space and ownership. This ultimately gets rid of their “NO”. I have counseled people who were sexually abused as a child, who were also abused even as an adult. The story is always the same, “I don’t even feel like my body belongs to me, therefore I had nothing to protect in that moment.” They had lost their “NO”.
It then comes as no surprise that the wolves would be attracted to a flock with no fence. This is why I was so flabbergasted by the fact that Gothard was allowed to surround himself with vulnerable young girls as his “assistants” even after hours when the building was empty. There was even a joke around the office about Gothard choosing all of the blondes (lost sheep to shepherd, we’ve got a DLR down at the IBLP headquarters, over). This also illustrates another point, wolves place sheep in positions of leadership around them which is why nobody seems to do anything. And years later we all watch documentaries like SHP with our jaws on the floor, wondering how something like this could happen.
Compliance Over Submission. This blog has already gotten longer than I had hoped and I’m planning on writing another blog on this one issue, so I will be short here. I will simply say that many of our churches have confused submission with compliance. An armed robber gets compliance from the bank teller when he shoves a gun in her face and demands money. This is not the same as submission. Submission is the loving desire to follow someone that has earned their respect and trust. In this way, submission cannot be demanded any more than love, it must be earned. People like Gothard and IBLP don’t really care about earning submission, they only want to demand compliance. And there is a huge difference between those things. This is another highlight of cult 101.
Reformed or Reborn? There is a big difference between unity and uniformity. Unity is made up of different types of people with a mutual love, respect and cause (i.e. unity in Christ). Uniformity is everyone being coerced into looking, talking, dressing and acting the same way (the rules). Uniformity only goes skin deep. It doesn’t change a person’s heart. This is an attempt to reform those who haven’t been reborn, or as we used to say in the South, "putting lipstick on a pig."
One of the hallmarks of the Pharisees was that they were concerned with “shining the outside of the cup, but inside they were full of deadly poison” (Shiny Happy people right?). Personally, this is one of the saddest things about false religion and cults in general. All people are born slaves to their own sin nature anyway. Instead of teaching them the gospel of grace in which a person can be forgiven and made a new creature through repentance and faith in Christ and His finished work on the cross, they are repressed by rules. So instead of someone being set free from their sin, that sinful nature is repressed and caged. It’s like shaking up a Pepsi bottle and expecting it not to blow. I believe that this is one of the greatest causes of the deconstructionist movement. This brings me in for a landing.
Recognizing a Trojan Horse. I can appreciate the producers of SHP for giving these victims a voice. They need to be heard. The wolves need to be exposed for what they are, absolutely. However, for anyone paying attention, the implications were clear, this is Christianity and Christianity=Bad. I am not upset at the documentary as a whole. I think for those that are, you are actually feeding the narrative. The only way that people will know a difference between true Christianity and false cults is to be different. This is why I want to make it clear that I wholeheartedly reject Gothard and the IBLP. They teach and preach a false gospel and have horribly misrepresented biblical Christianity. I wish they would remove all of their books, sell all of their buildings, publicly condemn their leadership and repent in sackcloth and ashes. I am an Independent Baptist and I want to scream from the rooftop that they don’t represent me or my Christ.
One Ditch is Not Better Than the Other. I couldn’t help but notice that some of the journalists and experts scattered throughout the series are openly atheists and/or LGBT+ affirming (this wasn't brought out in the series, but I know them through their other work). I would like to point out a couple of ironies here. First, from an atheistic perspective, they have abandoned any standard of absolute truth and therefore have no way to even define right or wrong, good or evil. The consistent and honest atheist has no basis or justification in which to condemn Gothard or Josh Duggar for anything. Evil by what standard? Wrong by what standard? Vile by what standard? Atheism isn’t the solution.
I also want to point out that the whole trans experiment is a VERY recent phenomenon. I am not a prophet, nor the son of a prophet but it would not surprise me at all if years down the road we will be watching documentaries about the horrible damages done to children who were made to be guinea pigs in this awful experiment. Unbridled sexual fantasy isn’t the answer.
What is the Solution? SHP is a documentary slamming Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar for their affiliation with Gothard and the IBLP. But ironically, the solution comes from another Duggar that received very little attention in SHP. I am talking about Jinger Duggar Vuolo. She recently wrote a Book entitled Becoming Free Indeed, My Story of Disentangling Faith From Fear. I will let Jinger give us the solution in her own words. “Perhaps you are reading this book and you are not a Christian. Maybe you reject the strict, conservative religious community that raised you, and you picked up this book hoping I was going to tell you that I had turned my back on my faith. You were imagining a story of enlightenment: a religious girl raised to always wear skirts and never kiss boys became an atheist or agnostic and now believes the Bible is nothing more than a collection of fairy tales. Sorry to disappoint you. That’s not my story. My faith is as strong as it’s ever been—not because Christianity tells me the right way to live or unlocks some “key to success” but because I can find no one more compelling, more lovely, more hopeful than Jesus. When I look at the man-made rules I put so much hope in when I was young, I see only emptiness. More emptiness and hopelessness would have greeted me if I turned to the world, just as they’ve greeted so many who have gone down that path. There is only one place to turn for the kind of hope that never fails: Jesus Christ. I can’t leave Christianity because only there can I find Christ. He is worth it. If you’ve left man-made religion, don’t replace it with a religion of your own choosing. Replace it with a person. Jesus. He is all that’s left—and all I will ever need—at the end of my story of disentanglement.”
There it is. The solution isn’t more rules, or no rules at all. It’s not a dead religion or deconstructionism. It’s not in a man or an organization. The solution is Jesus Christ and His death, burial and resurrection for sinners! Sin has many masks, including religion and atheism, and neither one is better than the other. Mankind’s greatest problem is sin, therefore his greatest need is a Savior.
Some Final Thoughts on Cults. Cults come in all shapes and sizes. They don’t have to be large organizations. I have seen cultic Baptist churches with less than 30 members. Just remember the hallmarks of a cult, unquestioned leadership, extra-biblical revelation, man made rules as a means of personal holiness, constantly tearing people down instead of building them up, a lack of focus on the finished work of Christ, all grit and no grace.
Last but not least, Jesus was always compassionate to sinners, but he was always firm with the false teachers who were enslaving the sinners. I think that this is a great lesson when it comes to examining groups like the IBLP. The leaders have been exposed and that is a good thing. But we need to remember that within such a large group there are no doubt good people who have been taken advantage of. No one joins a group like IBLP with the intention of things turning out like they did. It is very possible for any of us to be sincerely wrong. We must extend grace and compassion while speaking truth. We must remember that hindsight is always 20/20. My children aren’t grown yet, but one day they will be. Everyday I try to parent with this in mind. One day my parenting will be reviewed by my adult children. I believe that it will be ok if I recognize that The Lord is reviewing me now. I want to raise my children in such a way that they are independent of me and dependent upon Christ.
SDG, Brandon Vaughan, @realbrobrandon
P.S. if you are concerned that you may be in a cult, or if you have been the victim of sexual or spiritual abuse, my wife and I WILL be an advocate for you. You can reach me at preacherofgrace@yahoo.com
Resources for consideration:
Wolves Among Lambs, Stacey Shiflett
Finally Free Indeed, Jinger Duggar Vuolo
Please don't confuse "cult" with "occult". Cults are groups, while occult means secret knowledge, while they sound the same, they aren't identical. A cult can have occult knowledge, but none of the points listed are necessary to be occult. The occult by itself is very individualistic, not collectivist.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your input. I can certainly see where the confusion came from. I issued this clarification on Facebook, This morning. God bless,
Delete"Whenever you speak truth in a public forum there will always be critics. I think this is especially true with written material such as a blog simply because your words are in black and white, and open to be picked apart (not to mention interpretive issues). However, not all criticism is bad or ill intended. I wrote a blog yesterday about the docu-series "Shiny Happy People". It has been brought to my attention that using the word "Occult" to describe the IBLP isn't correct or fair, but maybe "cult" is more appropriate. While there is definitely overlap between the two, I have decided that in this instance my critics are correct. While I did use the words "cult" and "occult" interchangeably throughout the blog, my thoughts in using "occult" were to highlight the secretive nature of much of what took place. However, there is an an aspect of dark magic involved with the occult that as far as we know, the IBLP and its leaders were not involved in. As as writer, what I say must clarify what I mean and I didn't do a very good job in this instance. Therefore, I have gone back and changed all of the instances of "occult" to "cult" (although this change will not be seen in the title when it had previously been shared on social media). Some might think that this change is a bit nit picky and unnecessary. However, I want to try to be as fair and accurate as possible when I write about real life people and events. I stand corrected in this instance, and I apologize for the confusion."