Quote:
Originally Posted by TLFisher
Whatever happened to GF or BS? I thought they were elders as well or at least were when I was there along with Jim. It was Jim along with BS who came to my home before I began meeting with the Church in Renton. Basically saying "we love brother Steve, but if you don't make Steve Isitt an issue, you're welcome" to attend. No never would have made Steve an issue and never did.
I recall one Renton home meeting several older brothers were speaking among themselves and the topic of their conversation was Daystar. How interesting to be in proximity to have heard that.
I can see that more from IF than from MS. I sensed more humility from MS than IF. Observation from my experiences. Yet each I considered lacking maturity in life. Maybe it's just me, but a brother who passes through the Full Time training is fast-tracked to being an elder. When I was in Bellevue, I knew Jim Bilheimer and GF. It was only logical years later when they were elders in Renton. Being loyal brothers from 20-25 years. Same goes for BS who was in Seattle prior to Renton.
|
Yes GF, BS, IF, MS, are all the brothers I'm talking about here. BS is the brother who acts retired but still does a lot of elder functions and probably seems to be the "lead elder" there even though he is unofficial, where IF and MS are official. I need to be careful what I say because I don't just want to bash them, but these are the ones I'm talking about. I'm seeing that all of these elders and responsible ones are kind of in a little clique together in this area which includes the big up brothers from Bellevue and Seattle and probably Tacoma as well
These older ones all were at that brothers meeting in Bellevue (in 2007-2008) when SR was the main speaker and he was bashing Steve Isitt and his son Jarod. Jarod had recently got divorced and he was visiting Bellevue from Pullman because his job needed him in that area and he was still going on in the church life at that time (I don't know where he is now). And SR was really pissed that Jarod was meeting with his locality and was "rallying the troops" to potentially not allow it to happen. It did happen though. They never told Jarod he couldn't meet with them, but I feel like they almost did. The entire meeting was just SR bashing and bashing and it was wild. Like a KKK rally or something. I was pretty bewildered at such a display as that. That meeting was very uncanny to me because it exposed a side of the church I had never seen before nor care to ever again. And I was young witnessing it so I didn't know if it was standard behavior or not, but at the time it seemed horribly off. Eventually I realized that the leading ones, at least in this area, act very different in their private meetings than they do around the congregation. That exposed a lot for me and now that I'm older I'm able to figure out a lot of things that were previously a mystery to me about the church in general and about this region. Things I definitely do not like regarding the leadership
Now I ran up against the young elders mentioned here. And yes those are the ones I'm talking about. I need to be careful in what I say, but I would ultimately agree with Ohio's sentiments in this thread about how and why they're chosen to be in the position they're in. I will say that recently I called them out on their behavior and I was met with crickets. Which seems to be common when a leading one is called out on their behavior in the LC. No apology, no restitution, no repentance, just silence. Apparently they believe they're in a position above reproach and or this is how they're trained to react when they're called on the carpet. Not because their behavior is above reproach, but because their position is above reproach. Which doesn't sit right with me and isn't biblical. No doubt they view my calling them out as "criticism," or even view it as some kind of persecution, but I view it as accountability. If you're in a position of leadership you need to behave accordingly, and "taking the cross" and being silent when erroneous leadership behavior is taking place is akin to being an accomplice, or it's just being a victim. If there's no checks and balances for leaders then they can do whatever and walk around like they're in a higher position than others and this is exactly what I've seen in Puget sound with the leadership since I moved here. A lot of elitist type behavior with most of these brothers. Some of the older ones aren't so bad, but if you catch them from the right angle you can see it. The younger ones are much worse. And no doubt they feel pressure from the others in the clique in various ways. I don't know a whole lot about that because I'm not frequently in their inner circles like that, but I know they ARE an inner circle, and I feel like I've caught glimpses of them having a kind of inner clique culture amongst themselves. A culture that is not how they behave around the congregation, which leads me to believe they view themselves not as common believers, but believers in a more privileged position. Almost like celebrities in the recovery. None of that sits right with me for various reasons. Generally in my life I've always had a keen sense to sniff out phoney things and scenarios were people are abusing power and misrepresenting authority. I do see that in certain ways and certain extents here in this region. And I've seen common members treat these leaders as if they're celebrities and special. Well 1 Timothy 5:17 says elders who rule well should be given 'double honor.' But that's IF the elder rules well. That's not a given, and these elders act like it's a given and it's an inherently privileged position that they're in and they protect that position. Again, this behavior doesn't sit right with me. Furthermore if you read the footnote on 1 Timothy 5:17 brother Lee says that the type of 'double honor' here is with an emphasis on material supply-
Quote:
1 Timothy 5:17 1 honor
The noun form of honor in v. 3. According to v. 18, the emphasis here is on material supply (Rcv)
|
So it's questionable what type of honor they should be given anyways. It doesn't say give them honor like they're celebrities and can do no wrong. I see a type of fleshly reverence often for these "uplifted" brothers amongst the congregation and it doesn't sit right. I saw it with Bilheimer too unfortunately. And invariably these brothers start to walk around like kings. Again, some of these brothers I personally like and I've been to their homes, I've been out to eat with them, I've sat and talked with some of them, and some of them have been to my home. So it's not any type of vendetta I have or anything like that against them. It's solely regarding accountability on bad behavior. And if this behavior is a type of clergy elitism then I can't endorse it as being healthy for the church
Is it systemic? Is it in every region? Some on this site would say yes, I ultimately don't know because I haven't been around everywhere. I just know that in Spokane the leadership was very innocuous and laid back and didn't seem to want to lord anything over anyone. I feel it's different here. It's very clergy-esque and elitist. I believe they view themselves in a higher position than others and it doesn't sit right with me. I believe it's harming the church and particularly the function of the one talented members, which stymies the building up of the corporate body. This is probably why I feel like the expression of the spirit and the corporate growth in life is stifled. But there's nothing you can do because once they're in that position it's a wrap for life. They generally hold that position for life, even though I've heard that that position and function is not necessarily supposed to be for life. Kind of like congress I suppose. I've heard that if an elder is not acting right they can and maybe should lose their position. But that's not really what happens. They protect each other and protect their clique of leaders, similar to the papal system. All of this I believe is wrong and not transparent. Do these brothers realize that their behavior could be directly impeding the building up of the bride, which ultimately would delay the Lord's return?