If anyone is wondering, this is the same Brian from Florida who recently joined our forum (mid August 2022), and asked to join our church. He joined our church, entered into our Skype calls, came in late each time, had audio problems where he said he couldn't hear anything, and never spoke one single word to us in the small fraction of two meetings he attended over the course of four days, then chose to write me this letter announcing he was leaving:
BRIAN FROM FLORIDA:
Christopher, I think it might benefit the group for me to share some thoughts with you, as the founder and recognized leader. I hope you will share them with the group before you might share any thoughts with them, so the group can hear this as if from me, and not possibly have preconceptions. I say that because on your forum, I’ve noticed sometimes you’ll share all or part of an email that also includes your thoughts. Since my thoughts relate to the group, it doesn’t seem to be a situation where it’s necessary for me to go to you privately first. And the spirit of this online forum sems to be to share as a group. Part of my feedback does address a few of your comments, but still as part of the group interaction. Still, I’m going to you first, out of respect. I share these thoughts with humility, as iron sharpens iron, hoping that any or all of these points may help make this group more glorifying to our Father, and therefore in part more encouraging to each other. I share this after participating in the online forum for about a week and then with calls this week for the 1st time (much of Monday’s call and part of Thursday’s call, both of which I had a laptop audio issue). I realize Monday’s call was a prayer meeting, and Thursday’s call was simply a discussion. I wanted to at least join a 2nd call, to make sure the 1st call didn’t seem to be an exception. I also share my points as someone who has served in an elder-type of role and has been blessed to be part of small meetings of believers for years, where I seen different styles in various different nations and cultures like in Africa and Latin America. And I have learned some lessons from my own mistakes and things I have seen. And I have always appreciated feedback, so I hope this group does too. At this point, I think God is closing this door for me related to this group, so I am trying to go in peace.
I was waiting for this because you were acting really weird, and your letters were a bit strange. This is why I said I was
"cautiously optimistic" (
see here) when you first joined the forum because we have seen our share of people doing exactly what you have done so far, and saying the exact same types of things you are about to say in this letter. There were a few initial red flags for me concerning you, but I thought I would just throw all of my concerns into the side of charity and patience (as Christ has taught me), to wait and see all that you had to say, specifically in a group setting. Others in our church had red flags too that we discussed to some extent in our Skype calls before you joined, but I suggested that we show you some charity and patience, and wait for you to have more conversation with us over our Skype meetings, and the church agreed. Just to be clear, you were made a member of our church (i.e. it's already been done), so departing without following the standards Jesus Christ listed out in Matthew 18 (as I quote at the end of this email) will be on you, not on us. It's your decision, but either way, our church isn't made for window shoppers.
I also realize it’s easy for some group members to be defensive, especially when they have a common interest in the group. I would add that this feedback is general consensus from three believers (to include my wife and adult son) who have each been walking with the Lord for years. For the group’s knowledge, I had checked with you out of respect ahead of time, so I knew they were welcome to listen in. I did not influence their reactions. Much of this came before I then shared a few additional thoughts with them. So I really hope that the group will take this to heart, as it comes from both male and female perspectives, and from much different ages.
I can tell you one major inhibitor for everyone to take these things to heart and to take them seriously, and that is your reluctance to share it with them face to face on the calls, out of your own fear and uncharitable judgment that they would not take you seriously and hear you out. Personally, I see that as a back-handed slap, no matter how many "good words" you try to use to smooth it over. If you are not even willing to give these people a chance, the very Christians that you have called "brethren," which is to be a part of a family who cares about you, then I am starting to see a side of you that I don't think is good.
If nothing else, perhaps the Lord is using me for a few days with this group.
As if no one's ever used that justification before.
That being said...
And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
-Rom 8:28So let's see what happens.
I also realize it’s tempting to react immediately, and to have reasons for why everything a group does is the way it is, including even technical challenges. I would respectfully ask the group not to do that. I also realize other obvious things, such as every person and group has unique personalities. So I’m trying to focus on the biblical points. I also realize I share at least one idea this group may already do, that just didn’t happen this week. For example, maybe you always do video, and for some reason that wasn’t shared, there was no video this week.
Anyone is free to do video on Mondays and Thursdays. It just becomes a problem for a lot of people for various reasons, so many of them do not do so very often. If that's one of the reasons you don't want to be a part of our church, and you were not even willing to raise that issue live on the call, then you should be ashamed.
So I tried to be reasonable and logical with some observations and conclusions.
I haven't seen anything like that yet. I'll keep reading. I see a lot of pretense and niceties to try and make yourself sound better, but I'm willing to hear you out. (As would all of our church if you would have had the courage and charity in your heart to give them a chance, and not pre-judge them based on your past experiences.)
Also, none of my motive for sharing this is because I disagree with Christopher on certain bible interpretations. In fact, it’s a bit amazing how similar we see so much of God’s word.
I'm starting to wonder about that. We'll see. I want to see what you have to say first.
It seems very unbiblical and odd that this group does not meet face-to-face on its calls.
Provide the Scripture to back up your complaints.
We know the 1st century church met face-to-face when possible, And it is already quite a challenge or question if a group can really act as a healthy body ‘virtually.’
Well, this church has been around for 13 years, and you've been in it for less than a week, so obviously, you must understand better than we do.
So seeing each other face-to-face is even more crucial. There is a reason Paul wrote about his anticipation of meeting brothers and sisters face-to-face (in addition to communicating in writing), and why Jesus says the eye is the lamp to the body (where we can assess each other and better encourage each other, since body language is so much of verbal communication).
And you're taking Matthew 6:22 out of its context and its metaphorical meaning, which contradicts your point that we have a solid agreement on the Bible. I would explain the verse in more detail, but you didn't make much of an argument in the first place, so I don't want to waste my time with it if you don't have any interest in understanding it. That being said, I certainly hope that you will take your concerns to the Christians in our church who have visual impairments, and let them know about their violations against Scripture.
Even if there was face-to-face, the lack of overall interaction and the frequent long gaps of silence seem very odd.
I think it's odd that someone would say it's odd when he confessed he was having audio issues and couldn't hear much of the conversation anyway.
It certainly doesn’t seem like a healthy family of believers, even knowing that every family has issues.
If no one has anything left to say at the moment, why didn't you jump in and say something? That seems a little hypocritical, don't you think?
One logical conclusion is it appears that at least some members, especially women, may not feel comfortable challenging Christopher and / or the status quo, partly because of Christopher’s style.
Ha ha!
I'll let them know that. I gotta' share this on the forum now. I was just thinking about it while reading this part, and that sealed it for me. This needs to be opened up for the whole church to hear. The ladies of our church have their own separate discussion group, and I look forward to their responses to your letter.
As I read through some prior posts, off memory I think it was Ellie (but I know it was at least a woman) who in one thread was defending Christopher in a situation where he was sharing a message from a disgruntled guest or member. And while she defended Christopher in a general way, I thought it was a bit courageous and unusual to see (in this group) that she did admit that he can come across harshly, and she listed a few specific concerns about him. After seeing many of his posts, I agree that he, as the informal leader, can come across often as speaking truth without love. And this sets the tone for the group. His sometimes harsh wording seems simply unnecessary and /or counterproductive.
I speak very directly because I talk with a lot of people. I can't spend a couple of days (as you did) creating a lengthy response to every person who contacts me. I just don't have the time. I know this sounds crazy, but that's why we started up Skype meetings for the church to talk to one another and work those things out. Pretty neat, isn't it?
It is perhaps God’s timing that enabled us to see some other troubling things in such a short period of time in just two calls. For example, on Monday, over a period of at least the last ten minutes of mostly silence, members just started dropping off the call without any closing prayer, goodbyes, etc. We waited until there were only 3 left, and then I figured I should just hang up. And on Thursday, even though we all know the short video that Christopher played was satire, it was very poor judgment for him to share the part where the actor curses God near the end.
Yeah, I didn't like that part at the end either. I shared it for the majority of the video to point out how accurate it was to reality, and sometimes, others in our church share videos of interest, or even documentaries, that have some things we don't like, and we don't approve of. We try to avoid those parts if possible, but we can't avoid everything when analyzing the things of the world. For example, I have shared clips from false preacher Steven Anderson in my teachings that I don't like and don't approve of, but the point is to analyze what is being said from a Biblical perspective. I have had to rebuke others in the church before for sharing things they should not have, and I understand this point very well, but I also don't condemn them and leave because they shared something I didn't like.
As for prayers and goodbyes, I was unaware that every meeting with born again Christians must start and end with prayers. Were there verses of Scripture that commanded that for the church that we need to adjust and adhere to, or is this just coming from your experiences? I gotta' say, for someone who talks about how much we agree on Scripture, you sure do seem to be making a lot of assertions of personal opinion rather than Biblical decree.
That was unnecessary and inappropriate to share, and to at least not give a heads up in advance.
I will agree that I should have said something ahead of time because I had seen it prior to that point, and for that I apologize that you did not get any warning, but (and the church will have to correct me if I'm wrong) I thought I did warn everyone ahead of time that there was some language in this that was not good because they know that I do that all the time.
That should be offensive to all of us.
Yes, and it was offensive to me as well, but it
IS the kind of thing that those men say and do in their various corrupt church buildings, which was the message of the satire.
But he also mentioned more than once how this video agreed with everything he has taught for years, which is quite alarming. A key part of the skit involved something very contradictory even to what we see are his political views, which was sarcasm about the pastor and people not wearing masks.
No, I said
ALMOST everything. But I'm sure your audio equipment wasn't working very well to hear me say that.
It was remarkably ironic that he and the group seemed to overlook this in the post-video reaction, since in a sense this group is masking their faces as well, and hiding precious faces and smiles that are made in God’s image.
I'm really looking forward to the church seeing your letter, especially since none of us ever wore masks amongst one another, we never stopped meeting together (even locally here at our home), and I warned the church about those things (that they were a scam) as early as Feb of 2020. So if you don't hear anyone commenting about the mask thing, that's because we have had
COUNTLESS discussions about it already. Since you keep harping on that your time with us was guided by God, did it ever once occur to you that you are
NEW to the church, and have not been part of our discussions that some of us have been talking about for many years before you ever showed up? Is it possible that God is trying to open your eyes to your own arrogance, or is that a thought that cannot be allowed for consideration?
Lastly, on a more minor point, it’s apparent that in a discussion, there can be different political views. But it’s certainly a red flag that Christopher seems to support the ‘Q’ movement so strongly.
"SEEMS to support" is not an argument. That's speculation. I don't support the Q movement, but thanks for asking me a question about it first--that was very charitable of you.
(I know Brian's going to be upset that I keep responding facetiously, but I have a hard time
NOT doing that when he keeps making absurd statements, and calling them "reasonable.") I believe the Q drops are legitimate from military personnel who police the NSA, and there are some others in the church who also do (because we've done some research), which is why one of our elders was asking me about it on Thursday, and no one has to believe any of that stuff if they don't want to, but that doesn't mean we take them off the table of discussion just because you have a differing opinion.
While he may agree with many of the Q comments, nobody seems to know the source. And the source could very well turn out to be bad. We should be focusing on sources that we know, especially proper versions of the bible and people that we can personally trust or at least verify.
I'm sure our church will enjoy that Geneva back-handed slap.
In open discussion, we open up the church to talk about anything that is on their minds, and it changes from week to week. I wish you had informed me beforehand that, after less than a week with us, we would need to change all our meetings and discussions that we have developed over the past decade to fit with your personal feelings. Just give us a list of everything you want changed, the order in which you want things done, the time frame you expect the changes to occur, and your Scriptural backing for all of it, and we'll review it and get back to you.
I’m not here to debate the main position of that movement, but it could also be a very nonproductive and nonbiblical movement designed to keep people waiting on the bench, so to speak. It could keep people always watching (with popcorn symbols like Christopher sometimes posts) to see when enough people supposedly ‘wake up,’ rather than taking more action. In both calls, even the Monday prayer call, we were on quite a bit and we didn’t hear any focus on the bible, prayer, or encouraging each other.
Yikes.
You know, I'm going to let the church respond to that on the forum. I want to leave a few things for them to address. I don't know if you'll listen to them or not, but I think they'll want to respond to that themselves.
While there is nothing wrong with having a Thursday discussion that is not necessarily a bible study or worship, it does seem like any group with limited time would at least want to include a heavy dose of God’s word in a discussion.
It depends on the week, but I can see how you think that you have a sound argument based on how many years you have dedicated to be in full attendance with our meetings online.
To again use a 1st century church analogy, we see no indication the persecuted church spent much time debating Roman politics, nor do we have reason to think they did. The danger in getting too political is that it takes our eyes off encouraging each other and glorifying God. Yes, there are going to be many political common ground points among real believers, like not supporting abortion. But what we sense in Christopher’s tone and writings is almost an angry obsession with this topic. One has to question how Christopher, for example, spends so much time almost every day making primarily political posts on a Telegram channel that aren’t necessarily apparently pointing people to Christ, when he could be spending that time in better ways.
I have an angry obsession with Roman politics? Hmm.
I spend most of my work day writing articles and books to teach people the interpretations of Scripture and warn them about false teachers. But obviously, I must be doing the wrong things because Brian's been sitting right next to me viewing everything I do all day, and if only I could watch what he does all day to get a better example, I might be a good Christian. It's a good thing he's here to help me learn how to do everything the right way, and his vast experience in church building leadership is becoming more clear the more he speaks.
And at least guests and new members have to question how much work his wife is doing with the farm and income, as we read on the forum, while he may not be often doing productive work, especially since we read he admits that laziness has been a big sin in the past. A logical question is how much time does Christopher, as the informal leader, spend on political posts rather than teachings, writings, and helping with the farm.
I showed this part of your paragraph to Lorraine. All I can say is, she's not happy with you right now. But, what right does she have to be upset with you? I mean, after all, you've obviously spent so much time out here at our home, and know the ins and outs of our day to judge what we do, so I must be a terrible, lazy minister. The evidence is indisputable, thus saith Brian.
Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
-John 7:24Now I'm starting to realize why you sent me a private letter, and didn't speak up in Skype or on the forum.
I would caution Christopher and anyone in the group to avoid language and tone with specific words that may convey unnecessarily private info and/or not be encouraging or Christ-like. In one post, for example, I saw he mentioned that his wife had been “abusive.” That is a very strong word and a word with a very gray area of meaning to different people. And it raises many questions. There are also different kinds of abuse.
You know that Lorraine has come on to my audio teachings on the feminism topic and testified publicly on these things, right? Hmm. I doubt you knew that. It's a good thing you asked me before making public statements about it.
Perhaps I would caution Brian to do some research and ask some questions before embarrassing himself with accusatory false statements, but, you know, leopards and spots n' all that.
For example, while one spouse can be harmful physically, another can be harmful emotionally. Some of the posts that Christopher has shared come across as unnecessarily harmful and blunt. And at least in that one thread, it also can come across as prideful that while his wife was abusive, he was loving. That may have been largely the case. But again, for someone using discernment to connect dots, it’s a reasonable guess that the tone and wording that Christopher has always used with her may not have been as loving as he may think.
It sounds like you've been married to Lorraine longer than I have. I have to step back and give ear to your experiences with her; you seem to have much more than me.
For a separate example, as a few of you saw in one of my posts, I posed some friendly perspectives about the KJV bible and another earlier version (it’s not important which one, so as not to distract),
Folks, he's talking about the Geneva Bible. I hope that clears things up for all of you who are confused as to why he didn't mention what it was. He doesn't know or understand that we discuss Biblical topics all the time, and that our whole church discussed his and Ellie's posts about the Geneva Bible in our Skype calls before he ever joined.
after I read his article on the KJV. Again, some of the wording in that article is concerning.
I know, I agree. I need to rewrite that completely into a full-length book. I think I wrote the original draft of that about a decade ago, so I've got a lot of corrections to make.
In the long article, there was only one paragraph with a reference to a particular earlier version that he argued misused a word. It was certainly not a passage that would mislead someone regarding salvation (such as the Message translation of John 3:16).
Oh, look at that. He finally referenced Scripture. I think it's the only time in his entire letter of "Biblical" rebuke.
And he assumed a bad motive of the writer that may not be accurate. Regardless, it seemed unnecessarily harsh to suggest his reader throw away that version, at least based on only that one paragraph. And it seemed a bit concerning, given that the KJV largely used this translation.
Yeah, back then, I was working another job full time, so it was difficult with my sporadic schedule to write up a full expose on every chapter of every new-age version out there, and make hundreds of pages of comparisons. If only I wasn't so lazy.
Speaking of solutions, I will close with a few basic ideas that I hope the group will discuss.
Ooo! Based on everything we have seen so far, this should be totally reasonable and well researched with no bias or rash judgments.
Or, at least, that's what Brian has told us to expect.
Hopefully they are obvious, and they correspond with the above points. 1) I would encourage at least the leader and elders to have at least one video call with any prospective member, or face-to-face if it’s a local person.
You asked me for a private Skype call (via email) before you joined the church, and I said it wasn't necessary because you can say anything on the Skype calls openly with the whole church, but I also told you that I would give you a private Skype call if you thought it was necessary, to which you did not respond to me. So, let me give you a few basic ideas that I hope your family will discuss:
#1 - I would encourage you to listen to what people are saying to you, and speak up if necessary.
In the 1st century church, if a neighbor a mile down the road heard about a group, the group likely wouldn’t just write back and forth a few times and then declare him a member. At least one leader or group member would meet him face-to-face first. And if both parties felt God’s direction, it’s likely the group would then invite that person to at least one group meeting before asking that person to join or giving that person the group’s blessing. 2) Have video calls instead of audio calls. And it’s part of the responsibility of the leader or elders to facilitate everyone’s participation, including those who may like to hardly ever talk and may need encouragement to step out of their comfort zone. Every member of the body needs to function.
#2 - I would encourage you to step out of your comfort zone. That's what veteran Christians (as you claim to be) are already supposed to do. I hope you'll set a better example for others around you in the future.
3) When you have discussions, consider mixing up the topics.
Hey, everyone in our church, we need to take this to heart. I think, after 9 years of having our church online over Skype, we should stop talking about Q every week for the duration of every call.
Maybe you do, but the focus was political in both calls this week and is often about politics in the written threads.
Wow, I didn't realize all I did was just talk about politics. If that is the case, why did you ever start listening to my ministry in the first place? You said it was your wife's suggestion, so maybe she doesn't have as much discernment as you think she does.
But I'm not an expert on another man's wife... I defer to you on that.
Oh, and that brings me to #3 - I would encourage you (and your wife and son) to join the call tomorrow for open discussion after the Bible study, so you can hear everyone's responses to your abundant comments.
4) Consider spending much less time on politics. And be careful not to proudly assume that your views represent God’s, when it comes to politics with nuance or gray areas.
Are you talking to the church, or me? I'm getting confused about that at this point. I would love to have you quote me somewhere claiming that I have said that my views represent God when it comes to politics (and I'm unsure why you would even say that), which brings me to...
#4 - I would encourage you to QUOTE people when accusing them of things, instead of paraphrasing their words anyway you wish. That's how corrupt new-age bible versions came into existence.
5) Consider how to make your calls much more welcoming and joyful. For example, each person could share a praise and / or verse from that day. Each person, including new members, could give a periodic short intro or personal update. I realize the group may disagree with much of what I share. It’s not fun for me, but I hope it was worth the time. And I thank Christopher for helping me unpack more Truth, and for the group having invited me to participate. In Truth, Brian
Well, considering that this letter is basically your introduction letter to the church after joining, I would say...
#5 - I would encourage you to be much more welcoming, joyful, charitable, patient, and longsuffering.
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
-Gal 5:22-23I have left
A LOT of things out of this response, and that is because of Brian's arrogance. I do not need to explain to him the details of what we say and do when he's not around to provide evidence to him because the Lord God sees what we do, and He knows the truth, which is all that matters. Brian has judged unjustly and in arrogance, and so he's not looking for evidence because he only cares about his feelings and opinions. To say the least, it was appalling that Brian would act this way, professing his desire for face-to-face interaction, and then running away at the first sign of controversy. It's completely hypocritical, but I do have to agree on one point that Brian said:
"the Lord is using me for a few days with this group"I believe that God had audio issues happen on Brian's end to block him from hearing the many other things that we discussed on those two days because, if he had heard them, it may have pleased him for a time, he would have stayed longer, and then it would have us taken much longer to discern what he is really like, and the true thoughts and intents of his heart, and so by this mishap in his equipment, we can now watch him judge unrighteously and without understanding, patience, or charity in real time, so we can better improve our discernment to spot hypocrites, and to keep them out of the church. It's my hope that Brian will come to his senses, and come to repentance of his uncharitable attitude towards us, so we can speak together in peace, kindness, and reconciliation towards one another, instead of the feigned "good words and fair speeches" he has used to try and deceive the hearts of who he believes are just simple-minded folks. (It's why he had to start out with a pretentious resume to impress and give himself authority, instead of just speaking plainly and using God's Word to back up his arguments.) Brian believes we are leavened, even though he won't just say it directly in plain speech, and I doubt he even believes we are Christians because, if he did, his first thought should have been to
SHOW us a better example, and make suggestions that would be to our benefit, having patience and longsuffering in charity with us, instead of selfishly fleeing because he didn't feel like he had a safe space.
The only thing I have learned from Brian's letter that I am taking to heart, is how sad I am for him that he doesn't have fellowship with other Christians, which is something very important for us, but at this point, I can see why he doesn't have it. He still has an invite to fulfill Matthew 18 with us on August 28th after the Bible study, and if he refuses to show up, then we will have to assume that he has departed from the church on unbiblical terms, and will have no choice but to remove him as a member. If that is the case, then, despite his unrighteous judgments against me and the rest of our church, I pray the Lord Jesus Christ would have as much mercy on him and his family as the Lord God has shown to me and my family, and that he would be richly blessed with all his needs throughout the coming rough months in our country.
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
-Matthew 18:15-17
END OF DISCUSSION
Show Posts
