About the author
More posts by Moderator
-
-
Seen "Shiny Happy People?"
May 31, 2023 // 280 Comments -
Their Day in Court: Part Three
February 22, 2019 // 167 Comments -
Their Day in Court: Part Two
February 22, 2019 // 0 Comments -
Their Day in Court: Part One
February 22, 2019 // 1 Comment -
Statement from Recovering Grace regarding the lawsuit a ...
March 28, 2018 // 188 Comments -
Rethinking the Nativity
December 25, 2016 // 145 Comments -
Bill Gothard’s Powerless Gospel
March 2, 2016 // 259 Comments -
Plaintiffs Amend Lawsuit Against IBLP, Also Sue Bill Go ...
January 10, 2016 // 1311 Comments -
An ATI Education, Final Chapter: Guilty Silence
January 4, 2016 // 168 Comments -
Introducing our IBYC/IBLP Facebook Recovery Group
December 31, 2015 // 24 Comments
-
Plaintiffs Amend Lawsuit Against IBLP, Also Sue Bill Go ...
January 10, 2016 // 1311 Comments -
Charlotte's Story
February 5, 2014 // 609 Comments -
Bill’s Cabin: Uncovering Sin
May 21, 2014 // 477 Comments -
Sacred Grooming, Part Six: A Secretary's Account of Lif ...
January 31, 2014 // 406 Comments -
Trapped in the Shadow of 'God's Anointed': Breaking fre ...
May 5, 2014 // 379 Comments -
Our Response to Bill Gothard’s Statement
April 22, 2014 // 359 Comments -
A Call to Repentance
June 6, 2013 // 353 Comments -
Bill Gothard Issues Public Statement
April 17, 2014 // 341 Comments -
The Agent of Satan
June 4, 2014 // 337 Comments -
Confident Statements Do Not a Solid Argument Make
November 6, 2014 // 330 Comments
-
JM, I could care less whether or not you think ...
December 16, 2024 -
Then I have to rule that you have no evidence for ...
December 16, 2024 -
Alfred isn't going to put that on his blog and if ...
December 9, 2024 -
I can easily say that Alfred hasn't denied it, bec ...
December 9, 2024 -
Alfred denied directly to me she and Sacred Honor ...
December 4, 2024 -
When did Alfred or Holly deny that she was Mormon? ...
December 4, 2024 -
Facts are this JM, Alfred denied when directly con ...
December 1, 2024 -
Interesting you bring up the Jinger/Jill controver ...
November 25, 2024 -
Here is the facts JM, Holly is a Mormon, part of ...
November 20, 2024 -
Because she isn't a fraud. I'm sorry that bothers ...
November 18, 2024 -
JM, let me be very clear to you. Holly is a fraud. ...
November 13, 2024 -
I don't disagree that that action is what should h ...
November 13, 2024 -
I have a very long-term view of Bill and IBLP whic ...
November 12, 2024 -
Some would say the posts here are just spin and fa ...
November 12, 2024 -
Curious that you would bring up "Charlotte" becaus ...
November 3, 2024 -
I have seen the Amazon series, and I've seen the r ...
October 29, 2024 -
Did you ever watch any of the Amazon series? The s ...
October 25, 2024 -
Yes, it does. Claims must be addressed because the ...
October 24, 2024
-
OK I fail to see the purpose of this article.
Take away the references to Bill and the handout is actually a very good tool for any young Christian person, who has been led into Christian service instead of marriage at a young age, to respond to legitimate questions that family and friends may have.
And BTW I don't think IBYC was or is the only Christian service group that prohibited dating among those serving for the group.
Here is one purpose.
“Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.”
(1 Timothy 4:1-5, ESV)
No organization that calls itself Christian should forbid *anything* having to do with marriage or potential marriage: dating, courtship, asking-out, intentional flirting, *anything*. You do not ignore a passage like the above in favor of finding some vague principle about how the most "useful" people "stayed single the longest." You do not make up rules that God has not made up and call them "spiritual." The only rule God requires of His people is absolute purity between brothers and sisters.
I was about to type that you wouldn't require marriage abstinence any more than you would establish a uniquely "spiritual" diet that required abstinence from certain foods, but of course Gothard and the IBLP/ATI organization(s) do/did that too.
AMEN!! If I may add, Col 2:21-23 is also an excellent passage in regards to this;
21 "You should not be touching, nor yet tasting, nor yet coming into contact,"
22 (which things are all for corruption from use), in accord with the directions and teachings of men? --
23 which are (having, indeed, an expression of wisdom in a willful ritual and humility and asceticism) not of any value toward the surfeiting of the flesh.
Yes, the power of this post can be lost in the subtlety of the evil inherent in these rules.
It's tough to pinpoint Bill's motives for compiling these talking points but there's a deep manipulation going on here that is more apparent in the recent sexual harassment stories. However, the manipulation is there all the same.
It's drivel like this that I found myself believing as an emotionally immature twentysomething who didn't know how to successfully conduct a healthy relationship with the opposite gender.
I eventually recognized the lies but not before I left at least one girl wondering what planet I came from. Kinda funny now that I'm married but saddening all the same for all the others who were duped like I was.
Thank you!
You do not make up rules that God has not made up and call them "spiritual."
I admit, I too was wondering "what's wrong with this article" I am just now doing some research on Bill because of all the current scandal against him. I am 26 years old and my parents have been a part of ATI since before I was born. My sisters went to Headquarters (some got kicked out, haha!) and Excell. My parents wanted me to go to Excell, but I've always been rebellious and head strong when it came to all the rules, such as dress, and I refused to go. Which is probably good, because I would have been kicked out, bringing "disgrace" upon my family. ;)
Anyway, 26 years of brainwashing that I have been trying to undo, without even realizing I was! I have been set free by God in so many ways in the past 2 years, but I am still, 'unlearning' things, if you will. Such as, dating, and courtship, and homeschool only, and trying to question all these things I took as fact, merely because they were taught by Gothard. I hope all this makes sense. It's hard to come up against, especially when questioning Gothards teachings are still frowned upon by my family. I'm married and I have a daughter now, and the question of dating comes up w my non-ATI public-schooled husband all the time. He was forced to "court" me, and we have conflict a lot over what is approriate dating or not, for our children. I only know I don't want to do to my kids what was done to me! I was isolated. Not allowed to talk to anyone of the opposite sex or have friends of the opposite sex, or to be in group setting with them. And of course, that included, text, emails, phone calls, etc. I held hands with a boy for the first time when I was 18 and got called a slut by my parents. I bet a lot of parents wish that was all their 18 yr old daughter was doing, but I had such guilt and felt like filth for years. Ugh. All I can do is pray that God will help me and others get through this without bitterness...which is what I'm fighting now. :(
Such a good point. I have found that the trend now in some circles is to discourage single young adults/adult from the opposite sex to get to know one another. I have been around friends who were actually angry if I showed interest in a man. I though that was ridiculous, the Lord honors and blesses marriage and we will not find a marriage partner if we are not even encouraged to talk to members of the opposite sex.
I don't get the idea that young single people can't even just talk to each other. What do you think you have to do when married? Or even have basic platonic friendships. This whole think is pretty sick. God naturally gives us desires to be interested in the opposite sex and those friendships whether they lead to anything other than a platonic relationships are the foundation of a good marriage. It builds up a fear of one's own sexuality. Reading this old document, what floors me is the column of so called assumptions and meaning behind simple basic questions. How does anyone know the questioner is thinking these things. It is a horrible judgement call. I think Bill's own inner demons and fears and struggles really come out in this sickness. It also assumes that the questioners is obsessed with dating which again is a wrong assumption. I think the only person obsessed with dating was Bill who basically dated his female staff.
"It also assumes that the questioners is obsessed with dating..."
Good point. That attitude is quite prevalent with Gothard and his followers. From within the protective bubble of Gothardism, they assume that the rest of the world is obsessed with justifying their failure to obey Gothard's rules. Outsiders are not approached with even-handed curiosity but rather with prejudice and suspicion.
In the end, it's all about control and the failure to "balance" (to use Bill's own language) the focus on verticality with healthy horizontality. In the world of IBLP, horizontal relationships were almost always painted in a negative light as a threat to the vertical ones, and any positive framing of horizontality was always done to bolster the focus on verticality.
Good observation JB. Isn't it interesting that whenever a person invents a vertical relationship system, they invariably place themselves at the very top?
Why is everyone asking what the point of this post is? Not every article RG puts out is going to be some shocking revelation of sexual misconduct. What is just as disturbing are Gothard's false doctrines and teachings, and I think that one thing this document points out.
I'm not bothered by them prohibiting dating among staff members. Well, I am, but if the staff members knew those conditions going into the job and still accepted it, that is on them. I am bothered by the bizarre logic and scripture twisting, such as saying God blessed those who waited longest for marriage. ??? Huh?
This article opens my eyes to the worldview Mr. Gothard had from the beginning of his organization. It is a long journey in the same direction. Always controlling as it goes deeper and deeper into adding works to God's already perfect plan.
It seems he never believed Christians could be responsible for their walk with God, let alone their response toward others. From the beginning it was more about image than character.
Usually people that do not trust others have issues with finding themselves trustworthy.
It is a cult if the leader exerts undue control and/or influence over the life decisions of those on the inside and usurps normal familial authority.
Sex, power (persuasive influence), and money. These define the core underlying motivations of most cults.
In this situation, Bill Gothard's trusting of the young people is somehow to be considered reason to get the parents to accept and step back allowing whatever to go on. That's only the beginning of the manipulation that came out of vague bait-and-switch techniques Bill Gothard uses. Someday, ask those English teachers who went to Russia with a promise from Bill Gothard (which he, mysteriously, is never held to) that they would receive a salary for their living expenses. Yep, we were left with documentation in the ATIA newsletter of the wonderful sacrifice which which we had never agreed...and left without food money.
You just have to wonder if there should not be a principle definition where persuasiveness turns to abuse at some point as it violates God-given personhood.
"You just have to wonder if there should not be a principle definition where persuasiveness turns to abuse at some point as it violates God-given personhood."
I would say the principles broken where persuasiveness turns into abuse is in the areas of lying and fraud.
Although he feigned trust he did not trust those young adults. If he did he would have no need to script them. He made them believe he trusted them whereby it would be easier to use them. He deceived them plain and simple. He took their desire to serve their Savior and deceived them into believing how one does that is to serve his vision of ministry and godliness.
It sounds like in Russia he took away those things that aid in independence whereby young adults no longer had the ability to make autonomous decisions.
As the parent of an adult there was a point where independent thinking was recognized as a virtue. At what point did Mr. Gothard value independent thinking?
I agree Dreamer, why indeed?
A lot of companies have no dating (internally) policies. However I am sure that none of them look anything like this one!
But I think the point of this article is to show how Bill completely disregards his own policy in the previous stories.
Reminds me of Animal Farm. Some are "more" equal than others.
lol on the contrary I'm sure they are th only place that expects it's staff not to date.
Mostly because most organizations are not cults.
Hear, hear!
Mark in part you need to realize how loaded the words are. For example "Their frame of reference" is referring to the world, the outsiders, the sinners, the errant Christians caught up on the worlds ways.
We've seen lots of this kind of chart. Bill would expect us to reject anything in the middle column out-of-hand, or feel shame for even thinking about thinking of any of it.
I believe the point is how sincere, but naïve people, with good intentions, buy into the garbage that our so called leaders in church, try feed to the flock.
Unfortunately you are right. The purity/courtship movement is another group teaching anti-dating garbage, i.e Joshua Harris and the Botkins sisters.
There is only one teaching in the NT about opposite sex relationships and that is if you see an unmarried couple that obviously appears to have a hard time keeping their hands of each other to tell them to get married.
The Bible does describe these anti-dating teachings in this manner
1 Timothy 4
New International Version (NIV)
4 The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. 2 Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. 3 They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth.
Just to be clear, I do believe the point of dating to is determine whether or not you would marry that person. I am also not anti-arranged marriage as long as both parties enter it willingly.
Great point Andrew, yes these new movements have basically discouraged people from dating and finding a marriage partner. In a sense, I like the idea of dating with the intent of finding a marriage partner, and don't believe it's great to date many people just for the fun of it because that can lead to temptation and giving away too many pieces of your heart. With that said, how are you going to find a spouse if you just sit their in your room all day? I actually knew one woman (now in her late 40's), would get made if a man tried to even talk to her, assuming he had bad motives. She gave off such an attitude about the whole not dating thing that I think no man wanted to date her anyways. And yep, she is still single.
Oy vey! The last little paragraph is the kicker. While I agree that the first page seems harmless, take a look at how these adults are supposed to talk to their parents about it. Bill places himself as an authority OVER their parents, and apparently in the seat of God: "We are right in the center of God's leading of learning the ways of God.... Bill's not against my dating and marriage, he just wants it to be the right one." So Bill gets to pick their spouses and tell them God's will for their life. That's incredibly ironic considering his feeling entitled to "own" the girls who work for him and claim them emotionally.
That was disconcerting. It almost sounded like the staff was supposed to give this pamphlet to their parents and instruct their parents in the "proper questions to ask me". Or am I misreading that?
That's what it sounds like to me. Bill told the apprenticeship students many times about how he would arrange situations so that the parents would not "discourage" the young people in their commitments that he brought them into (consider Bill's fasting experiments where the parents said, "no.").
Bill putting his trust in my child or approving of what my child has "chosen to do" is without meaning when I am the God-given parent of the child. Bill can go find another child to manipulate and leave my children alone.
It's a wonder that Bill's umbrella of authority could not protect so many (ATI students and fathers) under his so called "authority" from sexual abuse and sexual sin.
Parents have ALWAYS told Bill, "No" more than their children have. Bill likes getting the children alone to work with them. This is a red blinking light accompanied by blaring siren in the middle of a red light district for any parent paying attention.
I'm certain we will see the purpose of this article sooner or later.
Incidentally, why did we think it was "normal" to build relationships/work/etc around "God's purpose for my life"? Wouldn't it have been a bit more straightforward - and biblical - to just build our lives on Jesus? On the hope of the gospel?!
Weird how the little stuff only starts to pop up when your eyes are open to the idiocy of the whole system.
When I was at HQ Mr. Gothard had at least 8 three ring binders that were stuffed full of questions people might ask, then lists of his "suggested" answers. He gave me permission to go thru them for my own education on how to answer and respond to people after I left HQ. I spent many long hours going thru them, I made copious notes so I would be ready to go out into the world.
Several years later I burned my notes. I should have spent time studying the bible instead.
I'm hoping others will understand why this post was posted by RG leadership, if not, I'm sure we will find out soon!!! It's perhaps called "salting the oats"
Wow... Is all of life scripted, to him? Can he not just answer a normal question off the top of his head with a normal answer? When people say, "How are you?" they aren't asking for a 3-point sermon on the Biblical meaning of life.
Wow... Is all of life scripted, to him?
It is when you approach the bible as giving point for point, all details included, counsel for EVERYTHING. This approach drives him to find the "answers" that he "knows" are there. Anything less would not honor GOD.
This approach to scripture is devilish, and does untold amounts of harm. The bible was never meant to be read this way. The hermenuetic is as bad as the individually horrible interpretations he comes up with.
It's a common descriptor of cults that their leaders have, indeed MUST have, a scriptural answer for everything. Wow.... that's a man of GOD, they REALLY know the WORD... etx.
The scripting, the formulas, that from what I can tell from the experience of my family is what made ATI so attractive to many families. Especially ones where one or both parents were not raised in a Christian home. It was "fail-safe" Christianity. The fallout however is never anything they are prepared for. Instead you have huge numbers of bewildered parents wondering where they went wrong because it was supposed to work!
While there seems to be some decent ideas re: dating in this print out, it bothers me that having the right answer is stressed so parents/friends don't get the wrong idea about Bill. It seems to be a "this is what you need to do, this is how you need to answer, and remember, Bill's good name is at stake so be sure to get it right!" As Christians, shouldn't we be more concerned about God's name and wanting his best? Instead this seems to promote the group think of "Bill says it, we believe it".
This article shows that back in the IBYC days, this was a cult. No employer tells his employees how to respond to their parents about their dating habits and how it has to be in line with what he believes.
And the part about the greatest people waiting the longest for marriage is nuts. Abraham? Do we even know how long he waited to marry? And Jacob???? He's greater than Moses or David? This is crazy.
Ileata, I think you nailed it - on both counts.
It isn't a problem that those on staff were asked to postpone dating or marriage while they were working at headquarters as long as they knew this when they got the job. The issue is... who gave Bill Gothard the authority to decide who his staff could date or marry. That is God's job, not Gothard's.
This document is just a sample of the twisting of Scriptures from Bill Gothard and his organization.
How does the verse from Proverbs fit with the subject? Where is this prayer of Rebecca's? Where does it say in the Bible that Abraham waited a long time to be married? Is Jacob really the best example? Yes, he waited a long time for the wife he wanted, but already had a wife by then. But you see questions are not acceptable in this organization. As seen above, a simple question is read into as an attack on the beliefs of Gothard.
At first the significance of this document mystified me as well. After some reflection this morning, I believe it illustrates three important things. One, it establishes that Gothard likes to control other's relationships even when he has no valid reason to do so. These were adults not teenagers. Two, it is a good example of how Gothard disseminates lists of specific ways to respond to people who might criticize his rules. This list shows that he sought to control how information was presented to those outside IBYC down to which words were to be used.
Three, this document establishes that a pattern of information control that has apparently been present since the beginning of his ministry. I personally parroted later ones on what to say when people asked why one wasn't attending college.
Parroted answers, yes, the ones he thought they ought to give. Not the ones the individuals on his staff had come to out of their own convictions, through studying the Bible and relying on the Holy Spirit. Because, of course, people can't be trusted to handle these things themselves - people can't be trusted with grace and freedom. Right, Bill?
I'll admit, I found this posting to be somewhat anti-climatic compared to recent revelations, but I do trust that all will be made clear in good time.
In the meantime, it reminds me of something I thought of yesterday or the day before. The database of comments on ATI students. I can't remember what it was called, but it amounted to a list of snitchery and personal impressions about every individual student from what I understand. I have heard of shock when one found out what people really thought about them.
That database takes on a much more sinister character in light of how BG may have been able to use it. Additionally it could also provide valuable information for convincing those who disbelieve that the Institute is a cult. It's a trove comparable to Wikileaks, I would imagine. Honestly I've had visions of a midnight raid of the computers at HQ. But then, I think I am an activist by nature.
It's a database system called "Contact." I can't seem to find any reference to it online. It was basically a Human Resources/ CRM tool that allowed a lot of customization and information storage. Remember all those "Apprenticeship Student" photos that were sent in every year? Those were uploaded into the system, along with comments about the family, and interaction with staff members.
There was a color coding system, that basically flagged different people as green, yellow, or red. There was definitely a hierarchy of permissions of who could see which entries. Basically 5 levels of access. A "Director" could see all comments, upload content, and flag people as red or yellow. Basically, yellow meant caution and red meant "big trouble." Really, there were not many folks that I saw flagged red or yellow. Interesting reading, though! I won't say how I know this, but it definitely could be used for checking out the character qualities (and shining countenances) of the opposite gender.
What I find interesting is the glorification of singleness through some sketchy examples to make a person more productive to serve God better. Scripturally, how exactly did Jacob serve God by stealing the birthright? He matured after he had 13 children and had a limp! Abraham wasn't following God until he was older. And Isaac was serving his father. The Christian ministry paradigm and singleness doesn't fit the context of those three men at all.
Yet I get the sense from this document that singleness is spoken about optimistically, as if this sacrifice is better than focusing and caring for your spouse.
What's interesting though, is that with that false logic in place, control can be used to say that a relationship is not beneficial.
Lastly, with IBLP being so focused on being "set apart", this shows remarkable awareness of what people would say or do from outside of the IBYC.
Also, how are all these big quiverful families to be formed if one stays single so long??
Mind control, anyone?! Wow. :(
and...what gives BG the authority or knowledge to give any advice/counsel on the topic of dating/marriage/parenting? He isn't married...has no children. He is biblically unqualified to lead according to Titus' direction to be "the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly."
Every single parent who is committed to Christ wants their children to honor God in every aspect of life including dating or not dating, marriage or not marriage and so on. We all want them to stay pure, and keep their hearts fixed on God's plan. BG does not hold the corner on the market for wisdom. The Holy Spirit does. Period.
On that basis Jesus wasn't qualified either, since He never married nor had children.
The issue with BG is not that he is giving advice, but the advice he gives (not just on this topic, but all of them) rarely (if ever) is based on a true interpretation of Scripture.
"On that basis Jesus wasn't qualified either, since He never married nor had children."
If there is one person who gets a pass to be able to teach on whatever they want, regardless of experience, it's Jesus. Since he designed marriage, I think it fair to say that he is okay to teach on the subject.
Gothard is not Jesus, despite what some of his followers might think.
"the advice he gives (not just on this topic, but all of them) rarely (if ever) is based on a true interpretation of Scripture."
I agree 100%
I'll push back here a little; I don't think the sense of Pauls words here are that a leader MUST be a husband, but if he is, he must be a "one woman man..." devoted to one woman, not several.
Paul himself makes no mention of his wife, neither does Timothy: yes, that would be a little strange in the Jewish world to be an unmarried leader, but scripture doesn't seem to forbid it, and history (John Stott anyone ??) would bear that out.
I'd add that single teachers/leaders that I've known typically tread carefully when teaching on what the marriage relationship, or parental relationship, is all about. This is a question of humility and admitting what you don't know (thru experience). And then there's the BG approach....
Scripture does say that Paul had a wife. He even had a pet name for her..."My Thorn in the Side". Catchy, huh? I guess he called her Thorny for short.
Renee, I agree. I have long appreciated C.S. Lewis's statement in his Foreword to "Mere Christianity" on why he didn't state emphatic doctrine on certain points:
"Ever since I served as an infantryman in the first world war I have had a great dislike of people who, themselves in ease and safety, issue exhortations to men in the front line. As a result I have a reluctance to say much about temptations to which I myself am not exposed. No man, I suppose, is tempted to every sin.... I have also said nothing about birth-control. I am not a woman nor even a married man, nor am I a priest. I did not think it my place to take a firm line about pains, dangers, and expenses from which I am protected; having no pastoral office which obliged me to do so."
Too bad Mr. G didn't read this and take it to heart.
Excellent excerpt.... curious how the wisest of voices speak carefully, with self-imposed boundaries, while others broach no restraint. I'm not sure BG ever valued self-reflection as a virtue.
No wonder Bill was not a C.S. Lewis fan. :)
hahaha.. a fan of a pipe smoking, brandy swilling Anglican (quasi-papist). Lewis had a very classical, broad minded orthodoxy, rooted in both scripture and history.. stuck on an elevator, what would they talk about :)
greg r, maybe superstitious work based sanctification or what it really means to be surprised by joy.
And where to find REALLY good tobacco in Indianapolis...
The purpose seems clear to me: these are Gothard's uber-spiritual standards for other adults on his team, while he himself apparently gets to have his way with the womenfolk -- emotional time, "couseling," "footsie," and worse.
In the 70's women could wear pants?! When did he start making women wear long skirts?
I find the comment about "people most used of God waiting longest for marriage" disingenuous at best, self-congratulatory towards BG at worst. Last time I checked, Mary was pretty young when she both bore the son of God AND got married.
Great point!
This should have been such a red flag from the beginning. I do not give answers I am told to - I give answers that are honest and from my own heart and brain. Right or wrong they are my answers.
This is a very scary document. I am sure that those who study and know cults would say this was the beginning of the end. Bill was seeing himself as wise and actually giving people words to say.
Give people questions to think about and to study what God says about a subject - Bible studies and devotionals do that and do it well. He could have left it at questions to think on.
It matters not if the subject is dating, parenting or cheesecake - this was the beginning of control of thought and word.
I'm sure many people did ask questions for different purposes of these staff members and the answers might have become tiresome.
But the thing that bothers me as an outsider looking in is this paper creates a distrust of the person on the outside no matter their testimony. We are painted as shallow. We are lumped together. BG assumes those of us on the outside are so busy with ungodly relationships that we have no time. Reading that makes me shake my head knowing how I on the outside have been judged by a system that doesn't even know me. (I have gone through this with family members married into ATI/IBLP.)
At the age of 21 I was asked to attend a business dinner to even the table as an extra young man had been invited. He was the business director of a company that could profit my company greatly. He picked me up at my apartment. I was ready when he got there as to not have a reason to invite him in. After the business discussions were over we had a wonderful time laughing and talking, absolutely no flirting. Afterwards we went out for coffee and he asked me if we could get together again. I told him I didn't know and asked him if he knew The Lord as his Savior. He said yes then I asked him for his testimony. He gave me a very detailed description of his walk with The Lord. He talked about how important it was for him to listen to the Holy Spirit because without the Holy Spirit's guidance he couldn't effectively do his job. He asked me for my testimony. Likewise I had a walk with The Lord to share. We moved on to our values and principles for life and love. Three and a half weeks we were married and that was 37 years ago. Still love my God fearing husband.
My point isn't patting myself on the back. My point is there isn't a system. We are children of God in love with Jesus guided by the Holy Spirit. There should be countless stories of how God in His goodness and love through the power of the Holy Spirit guides each individual and as we yield to His guidance we grow in Him. I would never believe that God must guide everyone exactly like He did me. His plan for them would be uniquely for them. As a person on the outside of IBLP/Y I never questioned family members following Bill Gothard's choices. I assumed they were living for God, just like I was, and didn't need my interference in their walk.
What I discovered over the years with those family members in ATI/IBLP is they have a false impression of those outside their system. They assume ungodliness based on BG made rules, as opposed to Scripture. It keeps them from questioning the system they live in. I'm ungodly. I dated. I chose my own husband (Actually God dropped him on my doorstep.) I lived by myself. I worked outside the home. (Although not after marriage per my husband's request.).
Are the above thoughts of Bill Gothard's to keep his members from getting to know people living free happy lives in Christ apart from his system because they will unknowingly through contrast show the irrelevance of his system?
"We are children of God in love with Jesus guided by the Holy Spirit. There should be countless stories of how God in His goodness and love through the power of the Holy Spirit guides each individual and as we yield to His guidance we grow in Him."
Amen, amen, and AMEN! This is exactly what is missing from Bill's teachings---reliance on the Holy Spirit, and His personal leading of individuals on the non-salvation issues. Bill sets himself up as a mediator between God and man, telling all men exactly what they must do to please God. We know from Scripture that this role of mediator can only be held by One---The Lord Jesus Christ. Bill has essentially taken Jesus's place in the mediation process and kicked Jesus and the leading of the Holy Spirit to the curb. THIS is why I believe Bill teaches a different gospel than the one found in Scripture---he does not believe in the priesthood of all believers, but sets himself up as Pope, Priest and only Mediator between God and man. Of course he would never say those exact words (he's not dumb), but he LIVES it, and has lived this way for 40 years of ministry. When people have to go to him to get approval for the smallest details in their lives and have a hard time making decisions apart from "what would Bill say?", we should see big red flags and run the opposite way. Bill is not, and can NEVER be, the Holy Spirit. The thing is, I never saw it until I got away and started finding freedom in Christ. Living by the Spirit is SO much more freeing and joyous than living by Bill's words. I'm so glad I kicked Bill's teachings to the curb and grabbed hold of my Jesus again---He's pretty amazing!
Very insightful.
Thank you for sharing these words.
Nancy,
As someone much younger who is still single, my experience with IBLP was the other side of that same coin. I grew up in a household where "waiting the longest for marriage" was viewed as a mark of superiority. Although my parents are not in any way die-hard Gothardites, it's not too difficult to see just how much Gothard's teachings have seeped into their lives, especially my mother's. Any time someone we know gets married at a young age, the news is almost always followed by a remark like "They're rushing into it!" or "They should take it easy!", as if God's timetable is always the same as the one we like to project on others. I understand that life experience is playing into those reactions as well, but the influence of Gothardism is evident.
What was really damaging about this approach to relationships, especially when I was in my high school years surrounded by people delving into them for the first time, was that IBLP, with its radical "separation" doctrine among believers in the church, was designed such that people who adhered to the system were painted as superior to those who didn't conform to it. And that viewpoint wasn't difficult to transpose to social interaction, which led only to broken relationships.
One of the early lesson for me growing up was to avoid unhealthy comparisons. Unhealthy comparisons were defined as those comparison that are made only for the benefit of developing a spiritual caste system. I believe the Holy Spirit moves each person in His time for their benefit. Time tables and formulas should be individual based on the Holy Spirit's prompting. I can't imagine being taught a desire for superiority. This is part of my extended family struggle. As they judge me they believe I will judge them now that they have left this group. I won't. I believe they love The Lord and are wanting to follow HS's movement in their lives. That is between God and them not me.
Yes I heard a lot of comments on being rash. Lol! But then those making the comments were introduced to my husband and wanted to know why we didn't get married sooner. He walks with a very transparent character, although not overtly pious.
Whether single or married J. B. you love your Savior and desire to know Him more each day. As an older woman it thrills me to see the next generation continuing in faith. He is good. All things in His time.
This article continues the theme perfectly as Gothard clearly exempts himself from his own dating rules.
On second thought it would have been much more straightforward if only he HAD dated, rather than form inappropriate relationships with his employees. . ..
And even before ATI, adult staffers were treated as children, instructed on what to say to mom and dad. Good grief!
But I like the pants!
Not only did they wear pants young women were obviously allowed to sit on the shoulders of a young man. Which shows the constant turning the heat up on the frog pot.
Dating has a way of bringing people down a few notches with the potential for rejection and all. Courtship, while it can have it's place and is how my wife and I did it, can be worshiped as a "god" in and of itself. I found that during the first couple of years being married that I would often boast how successful our courtship was, yet there was a lot of arguing and stress behind the scenes....
Jonathan you are right, for some people who are sensitive and easily hurt by rejection dating might not be right for them.
I think whatever way a person chooses needs to be in compliance with where the Holy Spirit guides them. Sounds like you listened to the Holy Spirit as He guided you through those first couple of years to a better relationship with your wife. I love how He gentle opens our eyes to see those things we would miss without His prompting.
While dating my husband we talked about marriage being a commitment to God to love and honor one another. We already knew we respected each other. We have always believed the closer each one of us are to God the closer we would become. Isn't that what makes marriage work? It is a relationship of three.
When I was dating before meeting my husband I was looking for someone whose values and principles developed through faith in Jesus Christ matched mine. There were Christians I dated whose hearts were not in unison with mine. We became friends by making it clear to each other that we were not compatible. Rejection of a person wasn't necessary just because the idea of marriage was rejected.
I love the freedom to follow where He leads.
Micromanaging, much? :p
The part that stood out to me is "People ask us these questions because Bill has put his confidence in us."
It's not about faith.... It's not about being an example or following God... It's because if we don't we'll be letting Bill down.
Cult: "a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader."-
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cult
The post points out both the hypocrisy of Gothard, but also and I'd say more importantly the authoritarian control within the system, and the "Billism" in the very language of the instructions. It should, though it won't, also give some folks-that question why "Charlotte" and others didn't respond differently at the time- an understanding of why.
Speaking as an outsider here... can someone explain why Gothard seems to be almost anti-marriage, at least among his staff? For someone who teaches about marriage and family and patriarchy, pushing so many young people to delay marriage doesn't make sense. Plus, many have said that Gothard encourages large families, no birth control, etc. Doesn't he realize that, by delaying marriage until they are older, a woman might miss out on some of her child-bearing years?
And no, please don't think I'm saying women should get married and start popping out kids right away. I'm an "older" mom, too. But the chances of getting pregnant often decrease as a woman gets older. So Gothard's stance on delaying marriage seems at odds with his stance on having lots of kids. Or am I misunderstanding something here?
Dreamer,
I don't think you're really missing much. The cognitive dissonance is often palpable with BG.
Free/cheap labor. Plus, when folks get married, they might jettison their parent's thinking, and leave IBLP. That and the power trip of having so much control over so many areas of so many people's lives.
I've wondered about that too. Here are my thoughts on it. It is as though the young female staffers, that he surrounded himself with, were his harem. Perhaps he didn't do all the things that the kings of old did with their harems, but he clearly loved to surround himself with beautiful young ladies. As the kings hand picked their women from their kingdoms, so too did Gothard hand pick from his kingdom(the thousands of families that attended his seminars). Sending his servants to inquire about this one or that one, always the beautiful ones.
The ancient kings would make sure that the male servants that had access to the harem were off limits, often by castrating them and creating eunuchs. Gothard, too, did this to his male servants (staffers). Of course, Gothard could not physically castrate them, but, he created a virtual castration, in which men could not even show the slightest bit of interest in a woman, or risk being cast out. Those liberties with the young ladies were reserved for the king alone.
Gothard, and Gothard alone, was the "king", who would be the only one who was permitted to be a source of intimacy for the female staffers, whether it be physical or emotional.
Kevin,
That is eerie. Yesterday I was thinking the exact same thing about Bill having a harem. The comparisons are very compelling. That is honestly what it felt like at headquarters. There was a pool of favorites and pets, then there were the possibles (girls who would be perfect if they just lost 5 lbs or grew their hair out a little or fixed their teeth). Then there were the ugly ducklings who usually had something else to offer. Many of the less attractive girls had either parents on staff or heavily involved in the ministry, or their parents were wealthy or had political contacts. The men did behave as if there was a powerful king who would cut off their head if they were too friendly or encouraged flirting.
What a strange world it was, very surreal. At a time in life when many girls learn how to be attractive and interact with the opposite sex, some instinctively feared attracting notice from the powerful king and were deliberately bland and unattractive in order to stay beneath the radar. I'm sure many guys did the same thing, in other ways.
Judging from all these stories it would seem that he is anti marriage so he can be surrounded by unattached attractive young women with no competition from the guys on staff
Dreamer, I think he did it to have more young single ladies to pick from.
I can't help it. The photo of the snowmen. Is the small one Bill and does he have his hand in the pocket of his large supporter?
lol An early coded message. A cry for help to the outside.
[…] to read more about Gothard: (Link): Recovering Grace And from that site, get a load of the (Link): Dating Questions adult employees of Gothard had to reply to, which reminds me of this IFB list: (Link): Independent […]
Scripted answers for often asked questions is extremely concerning. It means the person being asked is not to think for themselves or actually listen to the question to see if it resonates - they will already have a memorised answer and then can move on.
It means that all will be the same. All will act in the same way and give the same answers to those who genuinely care about them and are concerned about them. This group-speak is cultic.
It means that they must never be seen to be anything less than perfect and in control. They are maintaining an image that is very false. And it is important to maintain that image so that outsiders think well of Gothard. If the facade was genuine, they wouldn't need to learn scripted answers, just tell a true testimony as to why they have come to live as they do.
It also means that when Gothard's supporters speak to us, it is very likely that they are themselves repeating a script. They aren't actually listening to us. And they aren't necessarily actually feeling as good about the things they are telling us are good as their words might seem. They are very likely to be maintaining yet another false facade.
Which makes me wonder. For all those parents and relatives of young people who had a wonderful experience at ATI, did they really? Or did you just see the facade. Maybe they don't trust you enough to open up about how they really feel. Maybe they don't trust anyone - including themselves - enough to voice their doubts and fears.
Exactly! Can't tell you how many times I've seen this with loved ones.
"All authorities, whether political or spiritual, should be distrusted, and extremely authoritarian characters who divide the world into "us" and "them", who preach that there is only one way forward, or who believe that they are surrounded by enemies, are particularly to be avoided. It is not necessary to be dogmatic to be effective. The charisma of certainty is a snare which entraps the child who is latent in all of us." -Anthony Storr, in his book, FEET OF CLAY, a study of the psychology of "gurus."
There are three things which are too wonderful for me, Yea, four which I know not: The way of an eagle in the air; The way of a serpent upon a rock; The way of a ship in the midst of the sea; And the way of a man with a maiden. (Proverbs 30:18, 19 ASV)
Rules rob God of this pleasure. :-)
Generation cedar.com and justindeeter.com both have recent and excellent articles making the case for marrying younger. Yet, thanks to ATI, most parents told their adult children that they could not even consider being asked to be courted until they were at least mid twenties
The bit that leaps out at me is a tiny little throwaway on the last page, where "We think you should be on your own" is translated as "We don't want to be liable for you for the rest of our lives."
My very devout father has been up front all my life about how he doesn't want to be liable for me for the rest of his life, but he's also been up front about WHY. And that's because even if he does take care of me until the day he dies, someday he is still going to die. And that day will be, should be, decades before I die. So sooner or later, I WILL be on my own, like it or not. My father and I have seen enough accidents and divorces to know that my getting married is no guarantee that there will be someone else there to take care of me until I die either.
So my father's philosophy has always been that the only way he can properly take care of his children is to teach them to stand alone in the world so that no matter what happens, we'll be able to take care of ourselves.
[…] So there was to be very little dating on staff, and even that was discouraged. Staff members who wanted to marry each other and remain on staff were also frowned upon. Single staff members were given a document containing suggested answers to possible questions family… […]
[…] going through because Bill expected me to be a girlfriend. I felt like he monitored my activities. When I was interested in any other fellow—my almost exact words, … I said, “… I feel like I … I said, “This is ridiculous, and I’m just being torn apart by […]
[…] Dr. Schultz also recounted a story where 15 out of 30 staff told him that they felt they needed to ask Gothard for permission to date someone. Many of these staff who were so loyal eventually had to leave because they could not represent […]
Change the word god with flying spaghetti monster and you see how evil this is. Sounds like billy failed with women and a rich man believs hes always ŕight so once be becomes successful he jealous of people who are married because he knows the best way. Flying spaghetti monster's way.
Willy (female) Sept. 22. 2015
I just completed reading all of the listed posts and noticed, until Dan posted in July, there was a lengthy span from beginning to end of nearly 1 1/2 years. Interesting.....
The Josh Duggar scandal in late May was the catalyst for beginning my research into how integrated this family is within the 'Institute'. I certainly found my answer. Very sad. This explains so much....
I am now a 'very seasoned' senior citizen who continues to struggle as a result of my indoctrination into this cult in early 1979 (shortly after my 'conversion'). Several years later, and just prior to 'hearing rumors' of a scandal involving his brother Steve, I abruptly abandoned his teachings. (I knew nothing of Gothard's own immorality until I began researching and happened upon Recovering Grace.) OMG!!!
I desire to interact with other 'older moms' who may also be struggling with an adult son (or daughter) relationship as per the family's early involvement with the 'insanity' of Gothard's ministry.
Blessings.....
In HIS Grip,
^i^ ^i^ ^i^
I am female and attended the seminars around the same time as you did (79-82, advanced 86). Had abandoned his teaching long long ago. I also think it helped that my husband and I were not attending Churches that supported him or promoted his materials and teachings. However, I don't think of myself as a "senior citizen" yet :). I did though know about the scandal with Steve at the time, it was reported in the news and the Church I attended at that time was very heavy into him and this had to be talked about. It was presented at least I remember that it was all Steve's fault and Bill admitted and asked for forgiveness for overlooking Steve's problems. On the surface that was sorta true but what wasn't explained was how long this was going on and how it involved Bill. There was a collected sigh of relief of sorts that it "wasn't Bill, just his rotten brother". I think sometimes the hardest person to forgive is oneself. You were a new Christian when attended, it all sounded good when sitting there listening, I'm sure you attended a Church that thought the same. The subsequent failed law suite by the former staff was deemed as unbiblical by that Church. I do think though after all of it, there was a gradual backing away from Bill and he seemed to reinvent himself with the ATI program. I think it is easier to leave his teaching if you are not going to a Church that promotes him and his ideas because that is where the reinforcement is beyond the seminars. It doesn't sound like you raised your children in ATI so I'm not sure what damaging effects you are dealing with now. As adults though, they are now responsible for themselves and they have the ball in their court to undo anything they were raised with. I think you need to be comfortable with letting that go with them. Maybe seeing a change in you towards them would be a key. Of course there is always prayer and I strongly believe in praying for our children and their well being. I hope this helps since you asked for "older" mom's advice. However I'm not a senior yet!