Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

How did it get to this? Error in CFM doctrine

Expand Messages
  • hempkevin
    Lately I ve been thinking a lot about what scriptural emphasis I remember from The Door that justified their behavior (in their own eyes). Here are some
    Message 1 of 5 , Dec 20, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Lately I've been thinking a lot about what scriptural emphasis' I
      remember from The Door that justified their behavior (in their own
      eyes). Here are some things I've come up with:

      1. Pastors from CFM ministries and members in general wear
      ingnorance as a badge of honor. Let me explain. The only pastor
      that has received formal training in CFM is Wayman Mitchell. He
      disdained his schooling and felt that it dulled his faith and
      relationship with the Lord. You hear it said a lot at The
      Door, "Knowledge puffs up" (1Cor.8:1). If you follow the "logic" to
      it's end then you must conclude that knowledge is evil. Mitchell, in
      trying to re-establish the church as it existed in the book of Acts,
      has always said that the apostles never went to Bible College; in-
      fact, the ones who went to Bible College, the Pharisees, were
      a "Synagogue of Satan". He has made it a distinction of CFM
      to "disciple" leaders rather than to "pawn them off" to a "high
      minded" Bible College. The rational in doing this is the strong
      belief that the Holy Spirit is our guide and teacher and He will
      instruct and guide us in the way we should go (Ps. 32:8). The
      problem is that, as noble as this notion is, people are still flawed
      and do wrong thinking they are doing right. We are supposed to cross
      reference our "revelations" with the Bible to see if we are truly
      hearing from God or simply taking council from our own hearts. CFM
      pastors are so convinced that they are truly being lead by the Holy
      Spirit that they ignore the contradictions of their actions against
      scripture. How can they ignore scripture if they say they believe
      the Bible? I truly believe it's because members and pastors believe
      that Wayman Mitchell hears directly from God, in much the same way
      Catholics believe the Pope hears directly from God. We look at the
      atrocities of the Catholic Church throughout history and are baffled
      by how Church history can so blatantly and obviously condradict
      scripture, but it's rooted in the idea that the Pope is the physical
      representation of Jesus Christ on earth. Jesus heard from God the
      Father, therefore, the Pope hears from God the Father. When the Pope
      would issue edicts contrary to the Bible, the Pope had the last
      word. It's the same principle at CFM. Wayman has the final say,
      even if it condradicts scripture. At a pastor's conference in
      Prescott, AZ a few years ago, my wife and I, along with the entire
      congregation, heard a pastor introduce Wayman Mitchell by saying, "I
      saw a person today wearing a WWJD braclet (What Would Jesus Do?). I
      think we should all get WWWD? braclets (What Would Wayman Do?)." We
      all laughed at those "weak" christians who relied on such garbage.
      We can't see Jesus. But we can see His spokesman, Wayman, let's
      follow him. We heard it all of the time at The Door, "imitate me as
      I imitate Christ" (1Cor.1:11). We used to mock people who
      said, "don't look at me, I'm imperfect, I'll let you down. Look to
      Jesus." The Door despises this type of "drivel" as "spineless"
      and "weak". The Door says, "You should look at me; you should follow
      me, because I'm looking to Jesus and I'm following Him so you should
      be confident that what I'm doing is right. It sounds right, but what
      is the fruit of this type of logic? We see the fall out in examples
      like the following:
      1. "Bloom where you are planted" (Translation) "You must stay in the
      building (local church) you got saved in. Obviously God brought you
      here so God must want you here. Your purpose for God is inseparately
      linked to this location. His plan for your life is here in this
      building, in this congreation. If you leave, you are walking away
      from God's plan for your life. If you walk away from God's plan for
      your life then you are no longer covered by His grace. If you are no
      longer covered by His grace then you are no longer saved. If you are
      no longer saved then when you die out there away from this church
      then you will go to hell." This is a revelation that was received
      and passed down through the ranks of the fellowship by Wayman
      Mitchell. Is it biblical? Does it say in the Bible that you must
      serve the Lord where you get saved? No. But that doesn't matter
      because Wayman has "heard from God" He's the Grand Poobah, the big
      cheese, the top dog, the Shama Lama Bing Bang, and that's all that
      matters. The Bible in CFM is playing second fiddle. This Fellowship
      it truly a cult. I can't emphasis it enough.
      2. "If you don't street preach, then you're not saved". This quote
      came from John Murless a CFM pastor in Yucca Valley, CA. It was one
      of the last sermons I listened to before I left. Where is that in
      the Bible?
      3. Questioning their authority is forbidden. If you ask a CFM
      pastor "Where is that in the Bible?" then they defend themselves by
      intimidating you, berating you and taking a "How dare you question
      me" mentality.
      4. The Grace of God is mocked. My wife and I attended a CFM
      pastors' conference in Prescott, AZ a while back (in '92). Wayman
      graciously invited a guest speaker to attend and preach who was not a
      part of the CFM ministries. His style was obviously foriegn to me,
      and he preached a lot about the grace of God and His amazing love for
      us. After he was done preaching and left the immediate area, he
      became the butt of jokes and a person to be mocked over the pulpit.
      If a CFM preacher wanted to get a good laugh all they had to do for
      the rest of the conference was mock that pastor and say "Ooh, Grace,
      Grace". Are you saying that CFM doesn't believe in salvation by the
      grace of God through faith? Well, they say they do. But by their
      own definition I have heard it preached that "The only purpose of
      grace is to cover us as we're moving forward. "If we're not moving
      forward then we're backsliding and we are no longer covered by
      grace. And if we're no longer covered by grace then we are no longer
      saved. If we are no longer saved then we will go to hell when we
      die. Therefore, we have altar calls for believers to get saved again
      and again and again and again forever and ever. Members of CFM can
      never truly be confident in their salavation because in reality they
      are trusting that their works or lack thereof affect their grace and
      standing with God. They have taken the grace of God and cheapened it
      by saying your works validate or negate God's grace on your life
      which is no grace at all. This is a system of grace plus works and
      in the end it's all based on performance. Hello burn out, blow out
      and despair!
      5. There's so much more, but I'm tired and can't write any more.
      As Ken would say,
      Shalom
    • kenhaining777
      Kevin said: [4. The Grace of God is mocked. My wife and I attended a CFM pastors conference in Prescott, AZ a while back (in 92). Wayman graciously invited a
      Message 2 of 5 , Dec 21, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Kevin said:

        [4. The Grace of God is mocked. My wife and I attended a CFM
        pastors' conference in Prescott, AZ a while back (in '92). Wayman
        graciously invited a guest speaker to attend and preach who was not a
        part of the CFM ministries. His style was obviously foreign to me,
        and he preached a lot about the grace of God and His amazing love for
        us. After he was done preaching and left the immediate area, he
        became the butt of jokes and a person to be mocked over the pulpit.
        If a CFM preacher wanted to get a good laugh all they had to do for
        the rest of the conference was mock that pastor and say "Ooh, Grace,
        Grace".]

        I also attended that conference.  I was thoroughly disgusted and so were a lot of the people from my church who attended.  It was less than two years before I would leave the fellowship.

        I had been listening to Chuck Swindoll on the radio, and, if you are familiar with him, he is heavy on grace.  When I mentioned to Bill Coolidge that Swindoll says that there are no apostles living today, Coolidge's response was, "He's an idiot." (Coolidge had just referred to Wayman as "the Apostle Mitchell" in his sermon.) All of Swindoll's teachings were dismissed as corrupt because he embraces the eternal security of the believer.  These guys had no problem calling any and all other Christian teachers idiots, and even demonic. (Swindoll's book, The Grace Awakening, is a great book to read, by the way.)

        Wayman and the boys particularly hated Calvary Chapels because of their success, and because they didn't take offerings.  I was guilty of going along with this hatred and preachng against Calvary Chapel. You would think that we would have had something better to preach against than other Bible believing churches, but not so. (Perhaps the fact that the fellowship doesn't really believe the Bible has something to do with that.)  From the day I started attending the Door in Tucson I heard other churches being bashed. It was part of the program of Waymanchrist to impart a religious pride to the members of Waymanland.  That pride was useful in keeping members in the fold, with all the free labor and money that went with them.

        In the early days of the fellowship, we would frequently have preachers from outside the fellowship, and outside Foursquare Gospel, the denomination that we belonged to.  Depending on what they were like, they too were often subject to mockery after they left.  However, we would still keep trying different ministers from different groups.  Once we broke off Foursquare in 1983, we slowly began to have less and less preachers from outside our fellowship.  The preacher you saw in 1992 was probably the last time an outsider was allowed to preach at Prescott conference.  Actually, he was one of the first ones that we had at a conference in about a decade.

        The 1990 split complicated things for those independent ministers who would preach in fellowship churches.  At first Wayman told them that it was there business who they preached for, so some of them continued to preach for "both sides."  Wayman quickly back tracked on this and told these independent ministers that if they preached for the "rebels," they could no longer preach for the fellowship. 

        I guess Wes Baker finally had enough of it, and when Dale Reece split the fellowship in 2001, Wes went to preach for him anyway.  Mitch promptly threw Wes out of the fellowship, but I think Wes just flat didn't care at that point.  He had played Mitch's game for almost 30 years, and was probably planning on retiring anyway. 

        Any independent ministers who preach in the fellowship are few and far between, and the attitude is that they "need to submit to headship," meaning they must give their lives and hearts to Waymanchrist.  It would eventually come to a point where either they did that, or the fellowship wouldn't use them any more. 

        You obviously stayed for a long time after that conference.  It is interesting looking back and recall times where you "saw through it," yet the social mechanisms that were in place were just too effective, and you stayed.  I almost left the first year I was in Wayman's World.  I have often pondered what my life would have been like had I actually left in 1976, instead of 1994. 

        Based on what you wrote in another post, it seems your wife was more than ready to leave.  I would be interested in any comments you would have on that.  One of the methods of keeping people that the fellowship employs has to do with married couples where one is ready to leave, but the other is not.  In many of these cases, the spouse who wants to stay is the one who wins out. 

        Shalom, or Peace to you, Kevin
        Ken


         
      • Kevin Hemp
        My wife had already been at the church 8 years by the time I came on the scene.  She was divorced and had 3 kids.  Most of her immediate family was
        Message 3 of 5 , Dec 21, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          My wife had already been at the church 8 years by the time I came on the scene.  She was divorced and had 3 kids.  Most of her immediate family was entrenched at The Door in Yucca Valley so she really had no other support system.  I'm not much of an authoritarian, so I've always felt blessed that my wife was gracious enough to allow me to be the leader of our home and marriage.  Come on guys, let's face it.  Who really runs the family?  Yeah, the wife; however, in it's proper context there's a mutual respect for one another and that's something my wife and I have always had from the beginning.  If it came down to a power struggle, hey I admit it, she wins.  My wife never made me face that ultimatum, and I'm truly thankful for that. Also, by that time, we were becoming well aware of the turmoil that awaited us should we decide to really go through with it.  We took the path of least resistance and, I think, both kind of breathed a sigh of relief.
          Wow, you were at that conference!
          -Kevin- 
          -Kevin-

          --- On Sun, 12/21/08, kenhaining777 <kenhaining777@...> wrote:
          From: kenhaining777 <kenhaining777@...>
          Subject: [slamthedoor] Re: How did it get to this? Error in CFM doctrine
          To: slamthedoor@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Sunday, December 21, 2008, 7:58 PM

          Kevin said:

          [4. The Grace of God is mocked. My wife and I attended a CFM
          pastors' conference in Prescott, AZ a while back (in '92). Wayman
          graciously invited a guest speaker to attend and preach who was not a
          part of the CFM ministries. His style was obviously foreign to me,
          and he preached a lot about the grace of God and His amazing love for
          us. After he was done preaching and left the immediate area, he
          became the butt of jokes and a person to be mocked over the pulpit.
          If a CFM preacher wanted to get a good laugh all they had to do for
          the rest of the conference was mock that pastor and say "Ooh, Grace,
          Grace".]

          I also attended that conference.  I was thoroughly disgusted and so were a lot of the people from my church who attended.  It was less than two years before I would leave the fellowship.

          I had been listening to Chuck Swindoll on the radio, and, if you are familiar with him, he is heavy on grace.  When I mentioned to Bill Coolidge that Swindoll says that there are no apostles living today, Coolidge's response was, "He's an idiot." (Coolidge had just referred to Wayman as "the Apostle Mitchell" in his sermon.) All of Swindoll's teachings were dismissed as corrupt because he embraces the eternal security of the believer.  These guys had no problem calling any and all other Christian teachers idiots, and even demonic. (Swindoll's book, The Grace Awakening, is a great book to read, by the way.)

          Wayman and the boys particularly hated Calvary Chapels because of their success, and because they didn't take offerings.  I was guilty of going along with this hatred and preachng against Calvary Chapel. You would think that we would have had something better to preach against than other Bible believing churches, but not so. (Perhaps the fact that the fellowship doesn't really believe the Bible has something to do with that.)  From the day I started attending the Door in Tucson I heard other churches being bashed. It was part of the program of Waymanchrist to impart a religious pride to the members of Waymanland.  That pride was useful in keeping members in the fold, with all the free labor and money that went with them.

          In the early days of the fellowship, we would frequently have preachers from outside the fellowship, and outside Foursquare Gospel, the denomination that we belonged to.  Depending on what they were like, they too were often subject to mockery after they left.  However, we would still keep trying different ministers from different groups.  Once we broke off Foursquare in 1983, we slowly began to have less and less preachers from outside our fellowship.  The preacher you saw in 1992 was probably the last time an outsider was allowed to preach at Prescott conference.  Actually, he was one of the first ones that we had at a conference in about a decade.

          The 1990 split complicated things for those independent ministers who would preach in fellowship churches.  At first Wayman told them that it was there business who they preached for, so some of them continued to preach for "both sides."  Wayman quickly back tracked on this and told these independent ministers that if they preached for the "rebels," they could no longer preach for the fellowship. 

          I guess Wes Baker finally had enough of it, and when Dale Reece split the fellowship in 2001, Wes went to preach for him anyway.  Mitch promptly threw Wes out of the fellowship, but I think Wes just flat didn't care at that point.  He had played Mitch's game for almost 30 years, and was probably planning on retiring anyway. 

          Any independent ministers who preach in the fellowship are few and far between, and the attitude is that they "need to submit to headship," meaning they must give their lives and hearts to Waymanchrist.  It would eventually come to a point where either they did that, or the fellowship wouldn't use them any more. 

          You obviously stayed for a long time after that conference.  It is interesting looking back and recall times where you "saw through it," yet the social mechanisms that were in place were just too effective, and you stayed.  I almost left the first year I was in Wayman's World.  I have often pondered what my life would have been like had I actually left in 1976, instead of 1994. 

          Based on what you wrote in another post, it seems your wife was more than ready to leave.  I would be interested in any comments you would have on that.  One of the methods of keeping people that the fellowship employs has to do with married couples where one is ready to leave, but the other is not.  In many of these cases, the spouse who wants to stay is the one who wins out. 

          Shalom, or Peace to you, Kevin
          Ken


           

        • kenhaining777
          Kevin said: [My wife had already been at the church 8 years by the time I came on the scene. She was divorced and had 3 kids.] Did she get married in the
          Message 4 of 5 , Dec 22, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Kevin said:

            [My wife had already been at the church 8 years by the time I came on the scene.  She was divorced and had 3 kids.]

            Did she get married in the church the first time?  Or was she already married when she came in?  Was her ex a faithful member of the church?  Did he exercise any visitation rights with the kids?  What did they say about him at the church?

            She must have really been "the one" for you.  Most guys don't want to take on that kind of responsibility just going into a marriage.  Too bad the nephew is so weird.


            Kevin said:

            [Most of her immediate family was entrenched at The Door in Yucca Valley so she really had no other support system.  I'm not much of an authoritarian, so I've always felt blessed that my wife was gracious enough to allow me to be the leader of our home and marriage.]

            I had one gal tell me that she would never leave the fellowship, because if she did her family would disown her, and never speak to her.  Three of her sisters were pastors wives.  The way they teach people to disown family members who leave is especially wicked.  A total distortion of the Bible, and of any kind of decent behavior.

            Some fellowship guys are absolute overlords in their households.  They abuse both wife and children in the name of being the God appointed master of the home.  We had on gal stop over on Escape From the Fellowship and talk about how it was taught by some pastors to virtually rape the wife when she got in a wrong mood and attitude.  She noted that they said it was worth the clothes they tore to put her back in her place.  I have heard so many crazy stories about that fellowship that I tend to believe it.

            Back in the 80s, Larry Huch, who was sent out of Flagstaff, openly taught that women were to give their husbands oral sex on command.  He taught that this is a vital part of sex and that if a wife refused to give oral sex on command, she was causing her husband to commit adultery.  That one I have first hand, as I knew Huch.  He left in the 1990 exodus.  I think you can still catch him on Christian TV. 

            Then there was the way they treated the kids.  Did you send your kids to the boot camps at all?  Those were totally abusive, and designed to break the will of the kids.  The leaders even told me that it was for the purpose of breaking the will.  Crazy.  They even advocated spanking teenagers, which can get really funky. 

            So, it was better that you were not that authoritarian.



            Kevin said:

            [Come on guys, let's face it.  Who really runs the family?  Yeah, the wife; however, in it's proper context there's a mutual respect for one another and that's something my wife and I have always had from the beginning.  If it came down to a power struggle, hey I admit it, she wins.] 

            Members of the fellowship would, of course, point to this as being the "real reason" you left.  You didn't have your house in order and so Satan slipped in.  Mutual respect?  They have no use for that.  I am glad your home works for you.  And a lot of those who mock a man who defers to his wife are the ones who end up divorced. 


            Kevin said:

            [My wife never made me face that ultimatum, and I'm truly thankful for that. Also, by that time, we were becoming well aware of the turmoil that awaited us should we decide to really go through with it.  We took the path of least resistance and, I think, both kind of breathed a sigh of relief.]

            Many have faced the ultimatum to submit to the pastor, or the marriage will end.  George Potkonyak, who posts on Escape and some of the other message boards has a wild tale of his "pastor" breaking up his marriage.  The message is posted on Escape:

            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Escape_from_the_Fellowship/message/14945

            Take a peek, if you have the time. 

            How much discussion did you have with your wife before the final decision was made?  In one of your posts you seemed to indicate that she was disappointed when you, having come close to leaving, decided to stay.  I think that was where you mentioned the pastor's Vulcan Mind Meld Speech, which really made me laugh. 


            Kevin said:

            [Wow, you were at that conference!]

            Yes I was.  If I recall correctly, the preacher they were mocking was a Jewish Christian.  I forget his name.  Mitch said he was a nice guy, but just couldn't preach.  In other words, he didn't preach enslaving doctrines.

            Well, Kevin, answer as you are inclined and have time.  Thanks for your input.
            Shalom Aleichem



             

          • Kevin Hemp
            ... From: kenhaining777 Subject: [slamthedoor] Re: How did it get to this? Error in CFM doctrine To: slamthedoor@yahoogroups.com
            Message 5 of 5 , Dec 22, 2008
            • 0 Attachment


              --- On Tue, 12/23/08, kenhaining777 <kenhaining777@...> wrote:
              From: kenhaining777 <kenhaining777@...>
              Subject: [slamthedoor] Re: How did it get to this? Error in CFM doctrine
              To: slamthedoor@yahoogroups.com
              Date: Tuesday, December 23, 2008, 3:13 AM
              Yes, she was married in the church.  Her husband really had a problem with the church (surprise); however, he was also pretty much fed up with marriage in general when he left.  He never showed up to the divorce hearing so my wife got full custody of the kids.  This kind of turned out to be a blessing in disguise, because he never interfered with our lives or made any demands, but he also never paid any child support either.  Since my wife was divorced we couldn't get married in the church.  We went to the Justice of the Peace.  Yeah the 'shunning', 'disowning' part of leaving is true and really hard on a family.  My kids have taken the rejection part really hard. 
               
              Ah, the boot camps.  We never sent our kids to the out of town boot camps, but our church in Yucca had mini-camps that they'd do on a Saturday afternoon or something.  I remember some of the ex-jar heads putting together a boot camp called 'The Weapons of Our Warfare'.  My kids went to that and they shot guns for most of the day.  Yeah, kind of weird. 
               
              How much discussion did I have with my wife before the final decision was made?  Not much at all.  We made up our minds the same night we went to visit her other brother, the one who helped convince us to leave.  At that point, it was kind of like "The third time's a charm" and we 'stuck to our guns'.  Yes, my wife was disappointed when I changed my mind the first time and decided to stay.  Things were really tense between us for about a week.  But eventually things went back to the normalacy of wearing blinders again.  Thanks for writing.
              -Kevin-
              Kevin said:

              [My wife had already been at the church 8 years by the time I came on the scene.  She was divorced and had 3 kids.]

              Did she get married in the church the first time?  Or was she already married when she came in?  Was her ex a faithful member of the church?  Did he exercise any visitation rights with the kids?  What did they say about him at the church?

              She must have really been "the one" for you.  Most guys don't want to take on that kind of responsibility just going into a marriage.  Too bad the nephew is so weird.


              Kevin said:

              [Most of her immediate family was entrenched at The Door in Yucca Valley so she really had no other support system.  I'm not much of an authoritarian, so I've always felt blessed that my wife was gracious enough to allow me to be the leader of our home and marriage.]

              I had one gal tell me that she would never leave the fellowship, because if she did her family would disown her, and never speak to her.  Three of her sisters were pastors wives.  The way they teach people to disown family members who leave is especially wicked.  A total distortion of the Bible, and of any kind of decent behavior.

              Some fellowship guys are absolute overlords in their households.  They abuse both wife and children in the name of being the God appointed master of the home.  We had on gal stop over on Escape From the Fellowship and talk about how it was taught by some pastors to virtually rape the wife when she got in a wrong mood and attitude.  She noted that they said it was worth the clothes they tore to put her back in her place.  I have heard so many crazy stories about that fellowship that I tend to believe it.

              Back in the 80s, Larry Huch, who was sent out of Flagstaff, openly taught that women were to give their husbands oral sex on command.  He taught that this is a vital part of sex and that if a wife refused to give oral sex on command, she was causing her husband to commit adultery.  That one I have first hand, as I knew Huch.  He left in the 1990 exodus.  I think you can still catch him on Christian TV. 

              Then there was the way they treated the kids.  Did you send your kids to the boot camps at all?  Those were totally abusive, and designed to break the will of the kids.  The leaders even told me that it was for the purpose of breaking the will.  Crazy.  They even advocated spanking teenagers, which can get really funky. 

              So, it was better that you were not that authoritarian.



              Kevin said:

              [Come on guys, let's face it.  Who really runs the family?  Yeah, the wife; however, in it's proper context there's a mutual respect for one another and that's something my wife and I have always had from the beginning.  If it came down to a power struggle, hey I admit it, she wins.] 

              Members of the fellowship would, of course, point to this as being the "real reason" you left.  You didn't have your house in order and so Satan slipped in.  Mutual respect?  They have no use for that.  I am glad your home works for you.  And a lot of those who mock a man who defers to his wife are the ones who end up divorced. 


              Kevin said:

              [My wife never made me face that ultimatum, and I'm truly thankful for that. Also, by that time, we were becoming well aware of the turmoil that awaited us should we decide to really go through with it.  We took the path of least resistance and, I think, both kind of breathed a sigh of relief.]

              Many have faced the ultimatum to submit to the pastor, or the marriage will end.  George Potkonyak, who posts on Escape and some of the other message boards has a wild tale of his "pastor" breaking up his marriage.  The message is posted on Escape:

              http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Escape_ from_the_ Fellowship/ message/14945

              Take a peek, if you have the time. 

              How much discussion did you have with your wife before the final decision was made?  In one of your posts you seemed to indicate that she was disappointed when you, having come close to leaving, decided to stay.  I think that was where you mentioned the pastor's Vulcan Mind Meld Speech, which really made me laugh. 


              Kevin said:

              [Wow, you were at that conference!]

              Yes I was.  If I recall correctly, the preacher they were mocking was a Jewish Christian.  I forget his name.  Mitch said he was a nice guy, but just couldn't preach.  In other words, he didn't preach enslaving doctrines.

              Well, Kevin, answer as you are inclined and have time.  Thanks for your input.
              Shalom Aleichem



               


            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.