Hillsong - A Case For Change
There has been much talk, in the threads about documenting a “Case For Change” for Hillsong.
And very soon, Tanya Levin’s new book “Glass Houses” will hit both the boookstores, and the words contained within will be discussed and debated across the Blogosphere.
Recently, the Bulletin published a positive article on Hillsong, and to be more specific, the closing sermon:
“Skinner addressed the crowd with a blunt message: “You can’t separate God in his awesome power in heaven from the snotty, bloated kid with the fly in his eye in the ditch. God is not impressed by the size of our church. God is not impressed by how many times we go to church but by how much we become like Jesus. The world is on an accumulation binge - give me more and more and more - but God is a giver.”
We have all discussed the ‘what needs to change’ - but I am now left thinking.
1) Is real Change possible within Hillsong and other contemporary Churches?
2) What will be the real driver for change in the Contemporary Church (that includes Hillsong) - Critique or the Gospel?
3) Is reconcilliation without compromise really possible between the Contemporary Church and those overwhelmingly disenfranchised by it?
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:50 am
If ever there was a Case for Change- it comes through the words of the Hillsong devotees themselves.
This is a quate of an unthinking Hillong devtoee left on Emblazoned site”
It is little wonder that Tanya (the Signposts ‘Poster Girl’) dedicates her book to her “Sun” (son?) and makes the statement “may free thinking be the mark(?) of your generation.
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:54 am
The more I read that Hillsongers comment, the scarier it becomes. The implications are enormous. This is a cult mentality.
It’s like a comment from one of the people Sma Newman mocks in has ‘Street Talk’ segment o the Footy Show.
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:57 am
Crikey,
I am really not sure about this… this is the mentality of a Jonestown member - which originated in the AOG like Hillsong.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:49 am
The problem is that so many churches love the passage of scripture that says we are not to touch God’s anointed. In their eyes, that means leadership. If anyone criticises someone in leadership, then they are seen as touching God’s anointed and that immediately puts the “toucher” in the wrong.
This is why you will see comments like the one above. The basic belief is that if you keep honoring your leaders and doing what they want, you will be blessed, whether they are doing the right thing or not.
So between the “not touching God’s anointed” line, and the “be unquestionably faithful and God will see your heart and bless you” line, it makes it almost impossible to speak out … or rather, to be heard when you do speak out.
Love, Deb
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:37 pm
breathoffreshair, what you said has come up a few times on Signposts now as a reason to dispise these ministries, but I have to say that I have been involved with Pentecostal, charismatic, Contemporary and Word of Faith churches for a number of years and travelled, and sat under heaps of what you woud consider the ‘prime movers’ off these movements in meetings, read books, heard tapes, CD’s watched DVD’s watched Christian TV, in Australia and in the States, and I have yet to hear a minister claim him or herself as the ‘anointed’ who must not be touched simply because they face some kind of criticism.
In fact, the late Kenneth Hagin, who some consider one of the fathers of the modern Word of Faith movement, said he had determined to walk in love with people no matter what they said or wrote about him or his ministry, and is credited with never being critical, which is amazing grace when you consider the amount of flack he received and still receives, and most of it erroneous.
The only thing I can I think off that vaguely resembles this claim is that Benny Hinn said once to a congregation member he was passing during an altar call, at a Rhema meeting in Johannesburg about 20 years ago, “Don’t touch me,!” which was in referrence to his seemingly, quite superstitious, claim that the anointing on him might leave if someone touched him, which I found, even then, very unlikely since the Holy Spirit actually likes people who need healing, help, deliverance, etc., which occurred to me to be an OT idea of the anointing, but that is a completely different context.
Now I’m not denying that it nhas never been said or done, but have you acctually heard Brian Houston, or Phil baker or Phil Priongle and their Australian peers or contemporaries say this?
I think the ‘anointed’ referred to in the Word is actually Israel when in covenant, not some preacher in a pulpit.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:49 pm
As a Hillsong student, I an say yes, I have heard them say this.
And it was drilled into us all at college.
But i will concede the visiting speakers said it more. Perhaps the smaller church pastors were less secure in their position.
But certainly, the hillsong pastors never lifted a finger to question that kind of teaching.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Just to clarify - I don’t pray that God kills people. It was meant as a joke. I hope you realise that.
BTW - what’s the actual bible passage about “not touching God’s anointed”?
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:19 pm
Not a funny joke, OSO, but explanation accepted.
1 Chronicles 16:22 & Psalms 105:15, which contextually talks about the covenant between God and His people, Israel, to not touch His anointed, and, to not harm His prophets.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Facelift, I totally understand what you’re saying about not having heard this preached from the pulpit. It rarely was, although as Emblazoned said, it was said more by visiting speakers–which is interesting.
I think Emblazoned gives the perfect explanation of how this concept was absorbed into the congregation’s consciousness. It was drilled into him at college. That’s the sort of thing it was. It was not necessarily preached from the pulpit, but rather passed on through other teaching (cell groups, college, etc). To be completely fair, the actual leaders themselves may not have ever said this, but that doesn’t mean that it wasn’t implied and understood through the culture of the congregation.
I certainly heard it more than enough times, even if not from the pulpit. Actually, Emblazoned, I think it was part of the the FaithWorks teaching, although I could be wrong. Were you there when that was running? I’m not sure if it still is.
My response to this sort of attitude is probably what ultimately made me a non-team player (my own description). If a leader made a statement that I personally considered wrong, graceless or harmful to the people under them, I would quite often say something about it. I didn’t always pick my times well, and that’s to my shame.
But I always tended to be a bit like the boy who could see that the Emperor was naked and said something about it. That doesn’t always go down well. Then again, there were other times when people are too scared to say anything, when raising it with the pastor or leader actually would have made a difference.
We had a new pastor come into the congregation about a year before we left, and he basically stopped us having communion because he thought we weren’t taking it thoughtfully enough. He made that assumption after just one service (we only ever had communion once a month).
Most of us were horrified that he would do this–both for judging us and for stopping something that we are told to do every time we come together. Even though the pastor was a really nice guy, that fear of speaking out kept everyone quiet–for months and months and months.
I waited, expecting him to start teaching us the importance of communion if his belief was that we didn’t take it correctly. That teaching never came, and the months went by without us having communion at all.
Finally, after about 7 months, I sent him an email “casually” asking if we were going to start it again, and explaining how important it was. I sent it in fear and trembling, but knew that someone had to say something. It was getting ridiculous.
His response was to thank me for the reminder, and yes, it would be good to kick it back off in the New Year. He basically indicated that he had sort of forgotten about it.
So that’s the sort of thin line we tread in this sort of church. There are times when your input will be received quite happily, and there are other times when it is seen as being difficult. It was always a bit of a gamble knowing which situation was worth speaking up about and would have a good result.
To be completely fair, though, this fear to speak out wasn’t always the case (at least in my experience). It was something that grew over time.
Love, Deb
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:19 pm
OSO, I thought it was an excellent joke… I didn’t think it was a joke when I actually remember someone in leadership saying it. It was a long time ago, and I”m pretty sure it wasn’t when I was at CCC, but someone did say that if people are hindering your ministry, pray to have the “removed”. The preacher said that he had done it lots of times and people who had been bothering had moved, or changed their mind or even died in one case.
This is the danger of having the hierarchy… if one person gets it wrong, then everyone under them gets it wrong (well, most of them, except for people like us black sheep), then it turns into a nasty pyramid. I’m pretty sure that’s not what the church is supposed to be.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:28 pm
I have heard touch not the Lord’s anointed from the pulpit over the years. The last time I heard about it being taught to a group was approx 8 weeks ago. Re: not murmuring about change within leadership.
I have also heard the ‘improve or remove’ doctrine, and have heard it prayed. I shallowed both of these teachings hook, line and sinker myself, like a dope. Probably managed to hurt a few people along the way with these teachings myself.
Neither of these are urban myths.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:29 pm
swallowed, how the teachings are also shallow, I need a nap.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Yes..I can’t pin that ‘don’t touch God’s anointed’ teaching to Brian or Robert, but I do remember hearing it in youth from lower level Hillsong pastors.
And yes, I was there for faithworks. i did some of that material during my time at College, and I do believe Mr Loveday would support that kind of teaching, but I can’t remember him explicitly teaching it…but it fits him.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Wow … emanresu! I had no idea there was an actual teaching about praying to remove people that get in the way.
Several years ago, in a women’s group in our outreach service, the ladies were sharing some prayer needs before we started praying for one another. Anyway, one of the ladies said about someone who was causing them some problems, and said that she had prayed for the Lord to take them.
At first I thought she was joking, but then I realized she was quite serious. I very kindly, but firmly, explained that wasn’t really the sort of thing God would want us to pray for.
She told me later that she had never thought of it that way before, and really appreciated me saying what I did.
A the time, I couldn’t understand how such a lovely lady (who was also a fellow leader), could possibly have got that idea. But having read these comments about “improve or remove,” I’m starting to realize. So that’s one mystery solved.
Love, Deb
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:51 pm
Yeah, it’s kinda disgusting. Over the last year, during my “detoxing” I’ve come to think of many of my former beliefs that I now see as complete crap. I wonder how many people have turned away from God altogether because of some of these faulty doctrines that end up hurting them?
I think the worst bit for me was probably my late teens when I constantly felt like I was evil and God couldn’t possibly love me for all the naughty stuff I did. It’s so nice to shed these perceptions and just rest in God’s love.
August 3rd, 2007 at 3:15 pm
If you are a Christian then you are annointed… nobody touch anyone from now on ok.
maybe it means those annointed to obscure the gospel and fleece the flock
August 3rd, 2007 at 3:17 pm
http://www.myspace.com/case4change_at_hillsong
Re: latest comment by Danielle
I’ve clearly stated don’t make certain comments until the text on the left is read. Somehting tells me Danielle didn’t read it *sigh*
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:22 pm
As a shepherd (pastor) in a church reading all the blogs posted on sites since Tanya’s interview has been quite alarming, but eye opening.
My wife and I have also been part of the ‘walking wounded’ but have come through with our trust and hope in God. We are even now re-assessing the concept of ‘church’. Church are people like you, the Body of Christ. Church is not a building, denomination or institution. It became that way in the 16th Century. That wasn’t God’s plan. I know that God allows us to question Him, Scripture tell us that we can come boldly before the throne. He is a God of compassion and has felt the pain all of you who have been hurt on here, have suffered.
Respectfully, I say, and from own experience, if we put people up on pedestals they eventually fall on you. You become hurt and despondent. The enemy of our souls, Satan, wins a victory.
The only person who should be Lord of your life is Jesus. God wants us to respect one another and love one another, but not control one another. God gives us all a choice. If you suspect that you are under an abusive shepherd then pray for them, not against them, if things aren’t changing, take the ‘gutsy’ step and walk out and into God’s arms. Pray and ask God where He would have you go. The Bible tells us that God orders the steps of a righteous man. He will help you. In Matthew 28 Jesus says, hey, I’m with you always. Put your trust and hope in God, He won’t let you down, He came through for us and He will for you guys…hang in there
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Ummm…
emblazoned, the comments you’re receiving just confirm my view that Hillsong supporters:
- can’t spell
- don’t like punctuation or capitals; and
- love exclamation marks
The responses are just so predictable, it’s tragic. The usual lines about “the bride of Christ”, “being for or against”, blah blah blah. No real engagement with the issues.
emblazoned, I have been holding out on getting a MySpace, but this may be enough to tip me over the edge…
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:35 pm
fair go bec! its wonderful that hillsongers can use a keyboard! dont be so negative! praise God!
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:45 pm
“…if things aren’t changing, take the ‘gutsy’ step and walk out and into God’s arms.”
I think it’s gutsier to piss into the windscreen wiper bottle in their Audi..and then quickly run away.
And then pray for rain.
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:45 pm
neil007, thankyou for that thoughtful and affirming post, I found it encouraging.
Daisy
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:54 pm
Neil… same here man..
And Lance… well… I’m sure that’d piss them off.
I think it’d be wiser to pray for extreme condensation… who washes the windows when it’s raining? We need facts, man!
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:58 pm
David…you got me genuinely laughing out loud!
And lance just kept it rolling!
Nice work!
Welcome neil007!
August 3rd, 2007 at 5:00 pm
david…I’m looking like a right idiot, sitting here laughing to myself…
August 3rd, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Hillsong supporters:
- can’t spell
- don’t like punctuation or capitals; and
- love exclamation marks
Some of them are darn cute tho
August 3rd, 2007 at 5:20 pm
Wazza, you know what they say: you gotta flirt to convert!
August 3rd, 2007 at 7:18 pm
- can’t spell
- don’t like punctuation or capitals; and
- love exclamation marks
That sounds more like a description of MySpace users!
OSO: I thought the “Lord’s anointed” thing also came from where David has the chance to kill Saul, but doesn’t, because God has anointed Saul as king of Israel.
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:07 pm
Eric, you’re right about the reference to do with not touching the Lord’s anointed. It’s from 1 Samuel 24:4-7.
Love, Deb
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:23 pm
How is it that a passage about not murdering Israel’s king been taken to mean one should not be constructively critical of a church “pastor”, even if they are wrong!?
Perhaps I look through this prism because I am a theology student… but I keep thinking so many of the issues of contention discussed on Signposts (strange teachings on giving, on financial prosperity, on submission, very unhealthy power dynamics in churches, etc.) have reared their ugly head because some “pastors” have weak theological training and poor or non existent pastoral formation processes and ministry supervision. (and I think ALL ministers need a supervisor who’ll ask the tough questions about why they are doing what they’re doing).
I know requiring certain standards of theological education (and competence) is not a cure-all…. but it’s not a bad start.