I was invited to attend a bible study promoted by this organization. Actually, I didn't know the Bible study was associated with organization until tonight when I attended the first meeting of the "new semester". They will be going through the book of Acts. After the meeting, I have to say I have a lot of doubts about what I heard there. It seems very legalistic. For example, they want you to commit to 15 minutes of Bible reading each day as well as to answer a set of questions each week for the next study. I agree that reading the Bible is important and we should read as much as we can, but I have my reservations about requiring someone to read so many minutes each day to participate in a Bible study. That seems like adding something to the Gospel. It puts up a barrier to people desiring Christian fellowship and learning. Plus it ignores the heart. Of course, I can buckle down and read my Bible 15 minutes a day if I want to, but if I'm only doing it to satisfy some requirement for a study, I'm not sure what the benefit is. As for the questions, if you don't actually write the answers to the questions down, then you will not be allowed to speak during the discussion.
In addition, what little theology I got doesn't seem very Christ-centered or Reformed. Their main focus seems to be equipping people for evangelism. One of the main points of the study will be "How to receive the Spirit". There were two others, but I can't remember and didn't write them down.
I was hoping that this would be an opportunity to learn from God's word and to fellowship with other Christians (in English), but I'm afraid that if I continue to go, I will be constantly in conflict with the theology that is being taught. I really, really want to be able to talk with other Christians (in English), but I'm not so sure I should get involved with this organization. I would appreciate any other information you might be able to point me to.
By the way, I found a couple of other web pages critiquing the BSF which I have only briefly glanced at.
I, personally, would go to the study and use it as an opportunity share my beliefs with other christians. As far as there being a focus on evangelism, for many Christians, this is something that they need to be constantly reminded of.
I have heard pros and cons about this group. I think it depends upon who is hosting and leading the group. The wife of a buddy of mine in MO attends BSF and absolutely loves it. In fact, and this is rather sad, it has replaced what she and her husband have as far as teaching at their local church. In other words, she gains more out of BSF spiritually and doctrinally than what she gets out of the sermon on Sunday. I consider my friends to both be solid, Calvinistic Bible believers, and though they would point out that the emphasis of BSF is not to teach Reformed theology per se, my friend's wife says she has yet to encounter anything that she discerns as being unbiblical.
On the one hand, I do not care for the fact that the group in general discourages commentary usage when studying a book of the Bible. I find that down right dangerous and leads to a group of folks sitting around telling everyone what each individual thinks HE or SHE believes the Bible is saying, rather than discovering the true meaning of the scripture.
Fred
"Ah, sitting - the great leveler of men. From the mightest of pharaohs to the lowest of peasants, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" M. Burns
I've heard the same, Fred. It depends on who is leading the group. There are quite a few Reformed persons in the BSF here in town. Although, I also hear that, while they do not have a problem with what is said, the material used is normally broad and interdenominational.
Quote
In fact, and this is rather sad, it has replaced what she and her husband have as far as teaching at their local church. In other words, she gains more out of BSF spiritually and doctrinally than what she gets out of the sermon on Sunday.
Yes, that is extremely sad, and also dangerous. That's a big temptation in a world of parachurch organizations and the "cell groups" in some larger churches (not that small group meetings of a church are bad...they can be very good!...as long as they do not take over for corporate gatherings).
I actually find that I personally do not have time for parachurch organizations. I find that my time is taken up in my local church, and I go to chapel at the seminary Tuesdays and Thursdays. But chapel, although it is worship, is not the same as a local church!
Quote
On the one hand, I do not care for the fact that the group in general discourages commentary usage when studying a book of the Bible. I find that down right dangerous and leads to a group of folks sitting around telling everyone what each individual thinks HE or SHE believes the Bible is saying, rather than discovering the true meaning of the scripture.
I agree. I like what one of the seminary chapel speakers said last week: If you interpret a text in a way that no other commentator has come up with before, there's probably a good reason why!
True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
I echo both of what you and Marie mentioned about BSF. Also, I heard about them not using commentaries in studying the various Bible books; however, I don't know how they can get around them.
A couple of years ago at the Ligonier conference, Rosemary Jensen was one of the speakers at the conference. She was the President of BSF before her retirement from the organization. She mentioned in her talk, that she was able to coax the board to teach the book of Romans that year (or a recent year) and the course used material from James Boice.
Last edited by John_C; Tue Sep 07, 20047:52 PM.
John Chaney
"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ."Colossians 2:7
I agree. I like what one of the seminary chapel speakers said last week: If you interpret a text in a way that no other commentator has come up with before, there's probably a good reason why!
That's pretty accurate in my opinion. As far as using commentaries, the exact rule is the following
"Please avoid using any commentary, including study Bible notes, on the lesson until after the discussion group and lecture"
So they don't rule them out completely. But, still I don't like the idea of even asking someone not to use a commentary until after the lesson and discussion. One reason may be that they want to encourage people to think about the Bible on their own, but is that even a good thing. I mean we are fallen people and even as Christians our minds tend to try to distort Scripture to serve our on will. The other thing I am thinking of is that, being a non-denominational organization, they want to promote unity. If you aren't well prepared on the true meaning of a particular passage, it's harder to assert that your position is accurate and someone else's is not.
I'm still thinking and praying about whether to go back or not. I'm leaning toward, as you say, giving "it a chance".
As for using it as a tool for evangelism, the way it's structured doesn't really seem to suit that very well. The feeling I got at the first meeting was they don't want anyone to be to assertive that they have the "correct doctrine". I could be wrong about this, though, it was only my first impression.
I'll use this post to list some other of my impressions and thoughts. I hope someone will provide me some feedback. I don't know who this person is or if he just has an axe to grind, but some of my impressions are similar to some I found on this website http://watch.pair.com/bsf.html so I'll just quote some of what he wrote (Note: I don't agree with some (alot) of what he wrote).
Even after only one meeting, I distinctly got this impression.
Quote
Another questionable Shepherding/Discipleship practice of BSF is its adherence to a vast quantity of complex rules which are designed to promote orderliness within the organization, but which actually promote legalism. I sensed that any resistance to rules by participants results in their being labeled as rebellious or not in submission to their higher authority in the hierarchy, even when the rule contradicts Scripture.
Quote
Because of the above error, BSF exhibits the cultish characteristic of maintaining strict control over the flow of information within its organization. Nobody is allowed to speak about or discuss specific denominations. Nobody is allowed to ask other questions than those which are presented by BSF for discussion in the small groups. In fact, nobody is even allowed to bring up Scripture to clarify a point other than those Scriptures provided in the questions. (The exception to the above is "Challenge" questions where participants are allowed to bring in other Scriptures, but there are very few of these challenge questions, usually no more than one per week.) But most importantly, BSF will not allow their lesson materials to be given to anyone for scrutiny or examination unless they are a class participant. "BSF notes are provided for the personal use of class members during their active participation and must not be loaned or given to nonmembers." 12 Such secrecy is a common element of shepherding/discipleship groups and secret societies. However, II Tim. 2:9 states, "... but the word of God is not bound."
I'm not sure about the "cultish characterstic" part, but I did get this impression too. In fact, as I mentioned earlier, if you don't fill out the questionnaire before the meeting, you can't even talk during the discussion. In addition, you have to discuss only what you wrote on the sheet. So I assume that if someone says something you disagree with, unless you anticipated them and wrote it down in your answer area, you wouldn't be able to argue the point. And I really don't like the idea that I can't loan or give the notes to non-members. I suppose that I can still discuss them with others as long as I don't let the sheet out of my sight. According to the copyright notice, I can't even reproduce "in any form" "any portion" of the material. That means if I wanted to get your opinion on a particular point, I suppose I couldn't even do that (I think "Fair Use" actually allows this though regardless of their interpretation of the copyright law). My question though is "why are they so concerned if a non-member sees these materials?" Christians aren't concerned when non-Christians read the Bible. We aren't instructed to not give non-Christians a Bible are we?
Quote
The Small Group Discussion Leaders do not teach Scripture and do not acknowledge correct or incorrect answers. They simply encourage participation from all members and attempt to arrive at a consensus within the group about what the Bible is saying. Miss Johnson wrote,
I taught these leaders never to respond with "That’s not right," but simply to thank the individual and ask if someone else might have a different opinion. Discussion leaders were not intended to teach their class, but rather to encourage fellowship and discussion of answers and to have occasional simple discussion class luncheons.
The dialectic process (thesis + antithesis = synthesis) is at work here. The formula for the dialectic is "a diverse group of people dialoging to consensus over social issues in a facilitated meeting." This method will brainwash participants to abdicate strict adherence to Scripture for the sake of their relationship to the group. In other words, Thesis (What the Bible says) + Antithesis (What BSF says) = Synthesis (Allegiance to BSF's interpretation of the Bible).
I'm not sure about this point yet, but it worries me if this is the way the discussions are going to be run. Some of the most edifying discussions I've ever had have been some of the most argumentative. I am grateful for those people who, when I have been in error, didn't back down from their position just to spare my feelings.
There are other interesting points made in that article that mirrored some of the other impressions I had, but I don't want to quote the whole thing.
Claiming my fair use rights, what do you think of the following statements?
"A person has no power to witness for Christ until he has received the promise of the Holy Spirit following the remission of sins through Christ's death on the Cross. Have you ever definitely received the Holy Spirit as a person to dwell within you."
"Acts presents a cycle that is also the cycle of all Christian service accomplished in the power of the Holy Spirit. The cycle is this: Prayer is followed by power (to preach or witness) in such a way that miracles (of changed lives and spiritual healing) result. This is followed by persecution or opposition of some kind."
After reading your last post, if it were me, I wouldn't even think twice about it- I would definately not want to be a part of that group.
Hi Henry,
I want to reiterate that these were just my first impressions, which may not turn out to be the reality. I was hesitant to write some of the things I did since I didn't want to impugn an organization based on one 1.5 hour visit. From reading some things others wrote, it seems alot is dependent on the actual leaders of the particular group. On the other hand, I had a fairly upsetting experience with my previous church when the leadership changed. I know that once you make friends and connections in a church/organization it can be extremely difficult to leave even though you know that what is being taught is not in line with Scripture. I don't want to get in that situation again. Still, even though they were first impressions, they were fairly strong impressions in my mind. I'm haven't decided what I will do yet, but at the moemnt I'm slightly leaning toward passing on this one.
I understand what you're saying. Still, for me, if that website you quoted from is telling the truth, I wouldn't join no matter who the leader was- those rules do come across at "cultish," were it not for the fact that it was the Bible being studied, but still such legalism has no place in the body of Christ.
Quote
In fact, as I mentioned earlier, if you don't fill out the questionnaire before the meeting, you can't even talk during the discussion. In addition, you have to discuss only what you wrote on the sheet. So I assume that if someone says something you disagree with, unless you anticipated them and wrote it down in your answer area, you wouldn't be able to argue the point.
A policy like this is just bizarre, and defies common sense if real "study" is what is being aimed for.
Quote
But most importantly, BSF will not allow their lesson materials to be given to anyone for scrutiny or examination unless they are a class participant. "BSF notes are provided for the personal use of class members during their active participation and must not be loaned or given to nonmembers." 12 Such secrecy is a common element of shepherding/discipleship groups and secret societies
While I wouldn't call BSF a "secret society" is any way, the author of this quote is correct that these rules are characteristic of such.
I guess, to me, I wouldn't be worried about joining a cult, just an off-kilter group planned by some misguided people with some really weird rules that stifle real discussion and have the potential to allow a lot of incorrect teaching be accepted and even taught within the meeting.
Keep in mind, I'd never heard about BSF before this thread, and my $0.02 comes just from the comments and quotes you provided.
True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
Thanks for the link Marie. I read through the questions. I thought I would post my first impression answers to those questions here. Disclaimer: I've only been to this study twice.
(1) Does the ministry teach orthodox Christian doctrine?
I think I would say yes (see sub-questions). Hmm, actually it's difficult to say, because a lot of the core doctrines haven't been touched on yet (in a manner with enough precision that I could tell what meaning they are actually attaching to the words they are using).
They will put aside the final authority of scripture for the man-made teachings of the main group, or leaders of the group. Seems like they uphold the final authority of scripture. But, they sure like to be inclusive while doing it, so it's hard to say. One may argue (very strongly) that once you reach a certain level of "inclusiveness", you aren't holding to the final authority of the Scripture even though you say you are.
They reject what the Bible reveals about the triune nature of God. Definitely not.
They will alter what the Bible teaches regarding the person and work of Jesus Christ. Don't think so.
They will change the nature of salvation from justification by faith through God’s grace alone, to one of man-centered works. These groups have devised many elaborate methods for people to either earn their salvation from God, or to complete it in one way or another. Whatever the case, legalistic works are added to salvation to be carried out by the convert. In their view of salvation, faith upon Christ alone is not enough. I'm a little worried about this one. Mainly the "legalistic works are added to salvation to be carried out by the convert" part. They don't call it this, but they certainly seem to focus a lot on "doing things in the Spirit". Which isn't necessarily bad or wrong, but I am always wary of groups who use this kind of terminology alot.
(2) Does the ministry or it leader(s) claim to have special revelation apart from the Bible, teach unique doctrines, or claim any special, spiritual authority? I would say no except for one exception. That exception is the method by which they study the Bible. I can't remember the exact steps but it's something like "read, review, ask questions, apply". According to the main guy, this method of studying the Bible was revealed to the founder Wetherall Johnson. Or maybe, instead of revealed, it might be more proper to say that this method was divinely confirmed to her to be the best way to study Scripture, since others may have used this "particular" method before.
(3) Does the ministry or group base their doctrines upon the sole teachings of one particular individual, or small group of individuals? I don't think so.
(4) Does the ministry provide an articulate doctrinal statement? I haven't seen one. If they do, it's not prominently displayed and would have to be asked for.
(5) Does the leader(s) of the religious group, or ministry, conduct himself with personal integrity? Hard to know after two meetings, but I would assume yes.
(6) Does the leader, and the ministry he leads, have financial integrity? Hard to know after two meetings, but I would assume yes.
(7) Does the main Bible teacher, or the ministry, promise quick and certain spiritual growth and blessing with the reading of his or her books, the attendance of seminars or the supporting of the ministry? No, but there may be an implicit assumption that if you continue to attend this study, you will grow in Christ.
(8) Does the leadership, and/or members of the ministry, ridicule and condemn other Christians who may disagree with their theological opinions or the ministry’s doctrinal statement? No, I don't think so.
(9) Does the Church or ministry have a disdain for a Bible college or seminary education? No
(10) Does the ministry emphasize politics and Christian social activism over solid Biblical teaching? No
11. Does the ministry advocate and promote speculative conspiracy theories?
No
Please take all my answers about this organization with a healthy dose of "he's only been twice".
I understand what you're saying. Still, for me, if that website you quoted from is telling the truth, I wouldn't join no matter who the leader was- those rules do come across at "cultish," were it not for the fact that it was the Bible being studied, but still such legalism has no place in the body of Christ.
I guess, to me, I wouldn't be worried about joining a cult, just an off-kilter group planned by some misguided people with some really weird rules that stifle real discussion and have the potential to allow a lot of incorrect teaching be accepted and even taught within the meeting.
Keep in mind, I'd never heard about BSF before this thread, and my $0.02 comes just from the comments and quotes you provided.
Hi Henry,
I think you've mirrored a lot of what I was thinking. I don't think they are a cult either, and I don't even know if I would label them off kilter or not, but there is something about it that doesn't make me feel comfortable. So I am leaning very heavily now toward not going anymore.
I actually went a second time this week. The first week, all the new-comers went into an introductory class during the discussion time, so I wasn't able to see how the discussions were actually run. In the introductory class they told us the rules, but I wasn't sure how closely they followed them or not. Below are some of my observations.
For the discussions, they break the whole group (about 40-50) into groups of 10. You are assigned a group that you will keep the whole year. Attendance is taken. In fact, they ask for a volunteer to be the attendance taker each week, so they really encourage that person to come. Also, everyone got nametags to wear. I even got a nice laminated nametag. Both the attendance thing and the nametags didn't sit to well with me. It's little things like that that make me feel some kind of pressure that I have to attend every week. The attendance policy is kind of strict. If you miss three weeks in a row you're out, unless you contact the leader and have a good reason. Also, if you miss more than 8 times during the year (Sept-May) without valid reasons, you're out. I think this kind of attendance policy may be an "addition" to Scripture that isn't right. I can count at least 3 weeks in the next 6 weeks I can't make it due to some family members and friends coming to visit me from the US.
The discussion itself is really not much of a discussion. We go through the list of questions that we were supposed to do the week before. Each question is read and then one or two people are allowed to answer based on what they have written on the sheet. I don't think they are too strict about looking at the sheet though. I probably could have answered if something wasn't on my sheet or added some additional stuff to what was on my sheet. But, since the discussion time is only about 30-40 minutes and there are quite a number of questions, there is really no time for discussion. To complete them all in the time period, basically you can only give a short answer. My discussion leader really didn't make many comments about the answers given, but mainly just said encouraging things. For the most part, the answers given were pretty close to Scripture, but there were a few things said I didn't agree with. In addition, there were a lot of points that were vague and I couldn't attach exact meaning to the words being used. I thought this was very frustrating. For me, precision in meaning is extremely important.
After the discussion, everyone gathers again and the head guy teaches about the lesson. This time it was on Acts 1. I took a bunch of notes this week. I tried to write down everything I could so I could ask you guys some questions if I needed to. A lot of what was said was very accurate I thought, but some things made me a little uncomfortable. For example, some of the things I felt he got right that are often messed up is that the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" comes when you are saved and not at some later time. All Christians are indwelt by the Spirit and non-Christians aren't. There are a lot of Christian groups that get this wrong. On the minus side, here are some quotes that I didn't feel comfortable with.
"He will have expected us to do something in preparation and he gave us the Holy Spirit to enable us to." "The single over arching purpose is sharing the gospel and the salvation of Jesus Christ. He will have expected us to accomplish something in his name."
Principles "God has prepared you for service (by serving the people around you)" "Applying the Bible to your life is the best way to learn it"
Application Questions "How has God prepared you for service. Is there anything you are lacking?" "If Christ returned tonight what would he say to you about your service? What do you want to change?" "What will you pray the Holy Spirit will help you to do this week?" "How will you apply the lessons of Acts 1 this week?"
It just seems like the Gospel has been lost somewhere. Where is the focus on God and his holiness, justice, etc., our sin, Christ's work on the Cross, etc. It's like they start with these as basics, but then immediately move on to "doing works of service in the Spirit," and sort of only mention the first things on occaissionaly.
Since this is getting long, I'll split it up into another post.
Here are a few more things that struck me as being a little odd. These are from the lesson handout for next week. I'll just post some quotes from the handout.
Quote
Are you trying to witness for Christ, to serve Him in your church, or to lead your family to receive Him without having ever received God's promised Holy Spirit, not only to influence you from without but actually to dwell within you? If so, you must stop and first receive Him as the Holy Spirit of Christ to dwell within you and to experience His power to enable you to do the eternal work for which God has created you. This is the experience of being born again through faith in Christ.
I can't quite put my finger on why this particular quote rubs me the wrong way. Maybe it's just too vague and fuzzy.
Quote
These men in Acts 19 were very confused. In the early days of John the Baptist, they had been baptized with water to indicate their desire to reform their lives and to prepare for Messiah's coming. However, this was not an experience of salvation, for they had never even heard of the Holy Spirit. Certainly they had never received Christ to indwell them through the person of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, they still needed to receiv Him (and by receiving Him they would at the same time be baptized with the Holy Spirit) in order to experience the full fruit and assurance of salvation
I'm not so sure that just because these men had not received the Holy Spirit that they were not saved (they may not have been though). I mean even the apostles didn't receive the Holy Spirit until Pentecost, but I'm sure they were actually saved. What about all the saints before Christ? This raises some questions I'll ask in another thread.
Quote
Do you have the proof of being filled with the Holy Spirit, which is power to witness to who Christ is and what He has done
I'm not so sure the ultimate proof of being filled with the Holy Spirit is "the power to witness to who Christ is and what He has done." In Philippians, Paul rejoices that even some people who preach the Gospel out of envy and strife are still preaching the Gospel.
Quote
It is important to understand that God's promises require our deliberate prayer, even as we need personally to write a check before we can receive money deposited under our name in the bank. For example, God's promise of cleansing and new creation was followed by the requirement that they plead with God to do it for them (Ezekiel 36:25-27,37).
I just don't think this is correct.
Quote
From that time (Pentecost) the Holy Spirit is given to all believers. He enters immediately the heart of anyone who receives the cleansing of the Cross and surrenders to Christ as Lord and Savior
I just wonder about the terminology used. For example "cleansing of the Cross" and "surrenders" again seems very vague to me.
Quote
Are you now - this week - preparing for the Holy Spirit by receiving Him into your personal being (the baptism with the Holy Spirit)? Will you ask God to bring you into a deeper experience of what the Holy Spirit can do for you and through you by filling your entire being (the filling of the Holy Spirit)? You can prepare for the Holy Spirit's work by 1) taking time to let God make these Bible passages speak to you, 2) praying to Him about it and telling Him this is what you desire, and 3) doing some act of obedience to what He tells you to do in your present circumstances as you study these Bible passages.
Again, where is the Gospel. Where is the truth about man's sin and corruption and utter inability to save himself. Where is the truth about God's holiness, goodness, righeousness, justice, etc. Where is Christ. Why did Christ have to die? What did his death accomplish on the Cross? All these things seem to be non-existant. And besides the application points almost make me cringe. Is all that it really takes to prepare yourself to receive Christ (I don't like how the emphasis is shifted onto receiving the Holy Spirit instead of receiving Christ) is to do "some act of obedience" as you study the Bible.
Am I making a mountain out of a mole hill with these quotes? Even as I'm writing this post, I'm coming more to the conclusion that I should pass on this study.
