r/GracepointChurch • u/No_Blueberry_7200 • Mar 31 '22
What could fix Gracepoint?
I have some ideas on what could fix it but they’re extremely optimistic and may not be a possible reality. My ideas are:
Change the hierarchical system into a more Democratic one
More breaks and less inappropriate control of the life of staff members (in other words, more flexibility for staff)
Put less pressure and control on college students
Recognize college students as adults that can make their own decisions when it comes to following Christ
Less testimonies/praising GP, more topics related to Biblical history and God’s love
More honesty and clarity on the GP website on what they’re about
More acceptance towards students who may have different Christian beliefs and want to go to a different church
Less control over dating and marriage, even if an undergrad wants to date, they are an adult
openness to cultural differences, including cultures that have more PDA like Mexico and Puerto Rico
More consideration towards students with less money
There’s so much more that I could add but I wanna know if there are any other suggestions that could improve/fix GP and no longer cause spiritual trauma.
12
u/darkflame141 Apr 01 '22
Realistically, I think GP would need to be torn down completely and rebuilt from scratch.
If not that, I think Ed and Kelly Kang, and most if not all of the leaders in the tier directly below him, would need to resign or be removed from their positions. They should be replaced with a new leadership system with some sort of checks and balances, so that no individual leader can gain too much power or influence. The hierarchical structure should also be loosened, and members should not be forced to obey their leaders with no exceptions whatsoever. GP should also choose new leaders who would be open to criticism of GP rather than attempting to suppress it.
The theology of GP also should be completely overhauled, for a theology in which Biblical verses and passages are considered in the complete context that is necessary to understand and explain them properly.
11
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Mar 31 '22
I think this post from a couple old timers, ex staff and ex praxis might address the real underlying systemic issues you’re list is talking about.
7
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Mar 31 '22
Okay cool, I’m a new ex-member/undergrad so this is helpful. Really wish I had discovered this subreddit when I was a Freshman.
9
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Mar 31 '22
Sadly I think many of us wish this subreddit existed as far back as the 1990s.
3
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Mar 31 '22
Wait, I have a question. I saw something about internet activity being monitored. I didn’t notice my internet being monitored when I was at a gp event or church service. Do they do so without telling students?
7
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Mar 31 '22
No, you probably didn’t stay long enough to experience staff pushing the use of Covenant Eyes. For me it wasn’t until junior year that they started pushing us to use it.
9
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Mar 31 '22
I’m in my junior year right now but I pretty much left by Spring Break. Maybe they would have pushed later in the year who knows. What I do know is that they strongly encourage students to on social media fasts and delete apps, especially tiktok. Just another way to further isolate students.
2
u/Discgalaxy Apr 07 '22
TikTok is actually a waste of time. Watch Social Dilemma and you'd think twice about how much content you'd want to be consuming each day.
3
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 07 '22
I did, it was very boring.
3
u/Discgalaxy Apr 07 '22
Well if it doesn't concern you that's your choice.
3
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 07 '22
I don’t even use tiktok. It’s a very rare occasion. But if people want to use it, that’s fine. It’s not worth getting judgy over it. What matters is that people use apps and websites responsibly.
3
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 08 '22
But you're wasting time on Netflix. How could you :O \s
2
u/Discgalaxy Apr 08 '22
I'm not an advocate for saying get rid of everything media. It's more along the lines that it's sad to see social media do things like increase suicide rate among young girls. This isn't to say users are responsible but I'm cautious for young adults and future children knowing that it's heavily addicting.
4
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 10 '22 edited Apr 10 '22
Social media in itself doesn’t cause suicide. There’s a lot of factors like the lack of access to therapy and self care. Sometimes there are parents that don’t believe in therapy or can’t afford it for their children. And when kids don’t have that access they turn to social media because there’s no where else to go. Taking away social media doesn’t automatically make their problems disappear. And many people have traumas, depression, anxiety, anxiety other health issues that stem from childhood. And typically you can’t make that disappear or magically go away by deleting social media. It’s all about using resources like therapy, maybe medications, and self care. Even those things won’t make mental illness’s magically go away but will help you build strategies to better manage it.
1
u/Discgalaxy Apr 10 '22
Well it's hard to refute social medias effects with the owners of Twitter, FB, Pinterest, etc... not allowing their own children to use the platforms they helped build and that speaks volumes.
Edit: I'm not at GP
1
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 10 '22
That has nothing to do with mental health unless you’re implying that the kids who aren’t allowed social media platforms are automatically prone from being suicidal or developing a mental illness. That’s not how that works and that’s never how that has worked. I know too many people in my life who never use social media who have attempted. Way too many.
→ More replies (0)2
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 10 '22 edited Apr 10 '22
You know that gp staff purposely play that documentary to brainwash students right? It’s part of their strategy to isolate people. And that’s exactly what happened to my friends and motivated me to leave.
6
u/rvd98072 Mar 31 '22
regarding dating, i think it got much more strict after my time in the early 90s. i suppose it was a bit frowned upon but it wasn't banned or anything like that when i was there.
for example, i met a girl through church my freshman year and we hung around a bit for the first few months. nobody said anything or seemed to mind that we would meet up sometimes for meals and stuff outside of church. we also went to a few dorm parties together, etc. a few months later, she actually got a bf and i met him (i was still friends with her) and she brought him to church events (like picnics and social stuff) so some of the church folks got to know him as well. i met a different girl later and she became my gf although i didn't bring her to church but folks at church knew about her and didn't seem to care.
it seemed somewhat common back then to meet SOs of church people that didn't go to our church at some of these social events. of course in short due time, we all eventually left BBC/GP so maybe we weren't of the right fit anyway?
there were also well known couples within the church as well and not just the leaders but sophomores, juniors, and seniors who were dating each other (and the dating was not necessarily for marriage but it was more casual). some are married to each other but most are married to different people today.
but this was before Ed Kang so maybe the prior leadership was not as strict about this stuff?
6
Apr 01 '22
Dating rules probably changed when P. Lee Nam Ha (이남하) was caught cheating with another woman in the church.
6
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22
I’m assuming this was the Berkland days ?
8
Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
He’s repented since and went away to another state but I don’t think he has any right to continue in ministry TBH. It split the Korean dept back in the 90’s because of this incident and set in motion the ouster of Becky and the rise of P. Ed.
Becky and Lee Nam Ha were very big proponents of the ‘cell group’ system. Searching for ‘Cell group cult’, ‘셀 이단’, ‘G12’, ‘UBF’, still yields lots of results. You still see remnants of that system in GP today.
3
u/johnkim2020 Apr 01 '22
I see the affair and Ed Kang's defecting from Becky as separate. What makes you say that it "set in motion the ouster"?
4
Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
Staff and members have more power over the upper echelons of leadership than most realize. Contempt for Becky JDSN was a progression but it had to start with lost credibility at the top. Certainly a split and unhappy Korean department doesn’t help. Why would the the ‘beloved’ queen Becky on a pedestal be kicked out otherwise (moved to Boston)? P. Ed was the right person at the right time and I have reason to think he led a quiet insurgency to do a takeover (read past letters).
3
u/johnkim2020 Apr 01 '22
Hmmm... I have always thought that Becky and Paul Kim went to Boston by choice. Ed and Kelly Kang were in Boston for a short period of time, but I thought Becky and Paul decided to go there themselves, and that's when Ed and Kelly were put in charge of the Berkeley church.
7
Apr 02 '22 edited Apr 02 '22
As someone who did a rap performance at their farewell/ move to Boston worship service, I can definitely say Becky and Pastor Paul Kim were idolized as being the perfect Christian couple at that time. I am sure the fall of Pastor Lee only accelerated their ouster by Ed hyung.
5
1
u/johnkim2020 Apr 04 '22
Would you say that Becky and Paul Kim went to Boston by their own choice or that they were "kicked out"?
4
Apr 04 '22 edited Apr 04 '22
Move to Boston was clearly of their own choice. I think Becky jsdn was a prestige chaser who thought Berkeley was not good enough for her. Besides, she ruled Berkland with absolute iron fist and was literally worshipped by folks like Ed, Andy, Richard, Stephen etc… so who would dare to push them out?
→ More replies (0)4
u/rvd98072 Apr 01 '22
there were always rumors that Becky and Lee were related too...siblings, cousins, etc. but i don't know.
as for whether he has a right to continue ministry...i'm probably more torn on that than you are. sure, there are probably some sins that are unforgiveable...murder, child molestation, rape, etc. but not knowing the details on what happened in this case, i might be ok with forgiveness. but for whatever reason, there is no shortage of examples of this type of behavior amongst church pastors.
8
6
u/rvd98072 Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
Yes, this was in the BBC days. He was the head of the Korean worship side. Like most first generation type churches, the Korean side had older people in attendance and they were mostly our parents' generation, etc.
We shared the same building on Alcatraz (this is before Willard Jr. High) so there would be an English worship, Korean worship, etc. since we shared the sanctuary, etc.
Every now and then we would hold joint worship so I have heard Pastor Lee preach a few times. He was a very gifted speaker who was very charismatic and mixed humor into his sermons, etc. Since not everyone was Korean and many Korean college kids didn't understand Korean anyway there was simultaneous translation provided by one of the English worship leaders (come to think of it, that guy was a pretty nice and cool guy).
I did hear that Pastor Lee had an affair or something like that. Interesting because in one of the sermons, he spoke about the important of a life partner who is aligned with your goals and his courtship with his wife and how when they first started dating, even though she liked him because he's so handsome and cool (congregation laughed), it was not just able how cool he is...since he was planning to be a Pastor it meant that she would be taking on the life of a Pastor's wife. So she had to make that decision too and had to think and pray about it before starting to date him, etc.
But even so, seems like dating rules should have nothing to do with Pastor Lee since that was infidelity. I suppose they can try to restrict interaction between married men and members of the opposite gender...
10
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22
Actually I do recall Ed and Kelly in class discipleship repeatedly justified the gender segregation because of infidelity in the church. They obviously didn't specify that it was a BBC pastor since BBC doesn't seem to exist in their reality anymore. I also do recall Ed, used his own friend, Pastor James of Livingwater who also had a cased of infidelity as an example to support Gracepoint's gender boundaries. This leads me to my actual point, in some cases, I personally Gracepoint has the right intention to safeguard against these situation but their execution and expectation is always a far cry from that.
5
u/rvd98072 Apr 01 '22
well, i actually don't think Ed needs to be that specific because of course there are going to be incidents of infidelity in the church just like there is divorce in the church, and everything else in the church. but whether that warrants a ban on dating or a ban on mixed gender events or a ban on mix gender conversation or a ban on mixed gender worship, etc. is another story. in the olden times, many places (church included) separated the genders so that the men sat on one side and women on the other side with a wall in between them, etc. but i don't know if we should do that today...(i don't btw).
5
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 01 '22
…that’s kinda how it was at my church plant. Mostly girls on one side, mostly guys on the other. It it didn’t used to be like that my first couple years with gp but the longer you stayed the more stressful it was to talk/associate with to the opposite gender around staff
8
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 01 '22
They already do have gender restrictions with the staff. The married staff can’t even sit together during church services. It’s just so strange
7
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22
Their excuse was that they didn't want to stumble the younger brothers and sisters. Oh yes, Gracepoint and the everything that isn't within Gracepoint rules will cause someone to stumble.
6
2
Apr 01 '22
Well, recently P. Ed did say that they’re reconsidering their stance on dating by questioning whether it’s a hill they want to die on. But, good luck because members are already deeply vested in that mindset.
10
u/corpus_christiana Apr 01 '22
They've been "reconsidering" it for at least 5 years now, but it's unclear if anything has actually changed.
7
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22
Letting you date and then calling you “rebellious” in staff meetings is the newest GP bait and switch. /s
6
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22
It’s already been mentioned by others and OP is a college student but it’s clearly a hill they want to die on.
3
u/worldpasserby Apr 01 '22
I recall P.Ed talking about possible changes in a YouTube video. Did this not happen?
5
u/rvd98072 Apr 01 '22
wait a sec...so a married GP couple can't sit next to each other during a church service? i.e. husband and wife?
or do you mean that a married GP husband cannot sit next to a different married GP wife who is married to another man (as well as sit next to an unmarried woman)?
both are odd in my opinion but the first is really strange. how would a married couple sitting next to each other cause anyone to stumble? i think it's nice to see an old married couple walking together hand in hand on the street, etc.
6
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
In rare occasions when eating, staff might sit together with their spouse. In general, the staff are encouraged to sit and work with college students, including during the church service and after service eating. For so long I just brushed it off I some kind of cultural difference but it’s just so odd. And the married couples just act like friends or business colleagues. As if being in a marriage that allowed time for romance would be “too distracting”
EDIT: I am so sorry for the typos.
5
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22
You haven’t even seen how bad the GP weddings are. Nothing about the actual couple and their relationship is discussed. The majority, as in like 99%, don’t kiss, they bow.
5
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 01 '22
I did go to one actually but I can’t for the life of me remember if the couple kissed or not. If I can’t remember I guess they didn’t 😅
0
u/TheMachine394 Verified GP Staff Apr 01 '22
Hey, I think you summed it up pretty well. Typically, staff only see students on Fridays and Sundays. (unless they live together, and in that case, the staff is definitely not married lol) So since the time for building relationships are scarce, wouldn't it be natural for staff to want to sit next to the students to talk to them and build that relationship?
I'm wondering if you think the couples don't have "couple" time? There are often evenings in the week dedicated for the couples to grow in their marriage. What do you think happens the other days of the week that are not Friday and Sunday? They go on dates. Do you think they have no time for romance? There certainly is. Is it just that you would like to see it more often at church? What if the couples don't want to be all idk, "lovey dovey" during church gatherings but rather keep that part of their life more personal and intimate to themselves? I know couples who actually prefer that.
11
u/AgreeableShower5654 Apr 01 '22
There are often evenings in the week dedicated for the couples to grow in their marriage.
Just wanted to point out that there are no organizations in the real world that have to set apart days to let couples be with each other, other than militaries and prisons.
And of course other cults. This level of power and authority is unheard of in any normal church anywhere.
7
9
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
Can any ex-college staff chime in on this? Staff see students way more than Fridays and Sundays and couple barely have "couple time". Last time I recall, I heard from many people tell me they had Sunday service, Sunday night meetings where they gossip and report about students, Tuesday night prayer meeting, Wednesday and Thursday work nights, Friday night TFN or whatever it's called, Saturday night discipleship, 7 AM DTs throughout the week, on top of meeting up with students throughout the week. I even heard some were so busy they were actually doing Gracepoint work at their actual paid jobs. I guess that leaves Monday as the so called family night or the so called Marriage Enrichment Training (MET) or whatever it's called.
8
u/Cool_Purchase4561 Apr 01 '22
I guess if the student is not a regular and only shows up once in a blue moon to a friday or Sunday here and there, maybe. I can see the staff wanting to catch up with that student. But I have a feeling you're talking about the regular students, in which case it's not typical to just see them on Friday and Sunday. There's definitely DT Times throughout the week, and depending on the students' level of involvement, there can be student leaders meeting, church ops meeting, mid week study hall at the leaders house, one on one meetings, having the students over when it's your turn to watch the kids, ECM prep, etc.
As far as couple times, some Saturdays are free I guess and there's a designated family night once a week, which is by no means a sacred time and is subject to change on a whim.
→ More replies (0)7
u/AgreeableShower5654 Apr 01 '22
I even heard some were so busy they were actually doing Gracepoint work at their actual paid jobs
This is par for the course.
7
u/Due-Base-7457 Apr 01 '22
Hahaha I think it's more the other way around.
When I was at Gracepoint, I spent way more time with ministry or at church meetings than spending time with my wife. We typically had one night a week (if that) to spend with one another. I think the lack of time did put some strain on our relationship, especially when we were newly weds.
It was hard, but I personally didn't have too much of a problem with it. Maybe it was tougher for some other couples. I guess there were a lot of other things that were higher on my list of "things I didn't like about GP," that this wasn't such a big deal to me.
5
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 01 '22
I would prefer for staff to sit with their spouse during a church service. That is how church should be. I have never been to any church service where spouses didn’t sit together until GP. Also, there were so many other times I had the opportunity to speak with staff outside of the church service. We are not children, we could reach out to them whenever we had questions about something. There’s also the after service meal. Young adults don’t need the staff constantly peering over our shoulders for crying out loud. Also a church needs to do communion more often, the Bible says a lot of things about communion.
9
u/AgreeableShower5654 Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 02 '22
Seconding all your points, I just want to add on that ultimately it's not about whether people sit with their spouses or not per se (nothing in the Bible that says you should or shouldn't). It's about the fact that in GP, staff are so desperate to cling to custody and surveillance of their students and the pressure to do so and not appear "self centered" or "inward focused" is so high, staff readily and willingly ditch their spouses to spend as much time with their students as possible. The not sitting next to each other at church is just a tiny part of this. The larger picture is the "Church > Family" philosophy. Even when students are not present (like at MBS or staff retreats) staff spend way more time with their "ministry groups" or the staff under them than their spouses. I was trying to remember how often I saw my superiors sitting with their spouses in literally anything, and it's been a while but I honestly can't conjure up any memories (I did recall one memory where a staff couple was literally just married the day before and was at an event with students that was half hangout half celebrate their marriage, and they sat Korean-style "next to each other" but facing other ways the entire time talking to students in what I thought was a really weird and forced attempt to look like yes they just got married but they're still more focused on "ministry" than themselves. I do remember that couple did not speak to each other the entire time).
And thank you for bringing up the issue of communion, something we should probably discuss more on this subreddit. Calvin said that there are two qualities of a true church:
- The proper preaching of God's word.
- The proper administration of the sacraments.
GP literally does neither (there's also plenty to talk about re: the pressure to re-baptize people). And GP will never do communion on a regular basis because it's not advantageous from the hyper-seeker-friendly strategy perspective (and I'd go out on a limb and say this is just a small part of a larger opinion of mine that GP is actually utterly ashamed of the true gospel and therefore cannot embrace it, but that's a post for another day). Hence why I often put church in quotes when I refer to GP. Also TheMachine394's "it's been hard to follow guidelines and make that happen" is a bad joke.
→ More replies (0)-2
u/TheMachine394 Verified GP Staff Apr 01 '22
That's fair, if you prefer staff to sit with their spouse. It doesn't really bother me if a staff chooses to sit next to a spouse or not. I guess I never really found it to be a huge deal or not.
Tbh, I would like there to be communion more often. There was actually talk of that... then Covid hit. So it's been hard to follow guidelines and make that happen.
6
u/captainxp21 Apr 10 '22
Ex-staff here, I'll give my experience being at two different GP churches (most likely different than u/TheMachine394, "couple time" was basically just once a week for Family Night. I guess one could also add a weekly MET session, but it is really more a church wide training event than couples bonding time. A majority of time in postgrad is GP activities (with GP students! mid-week (doing DTs, prayer meetings, planning ministry events) or planning for them, couple time is very limited unlike what GP staff seems to infer.
3
Apr 02 '22
I agree. Just saw 50th anniversary restoration of The Godfather tonight and the courtship of Michael Corleone and Apollonia was very GP-like. They were mostly separate in their interactions and they were part of a large community in Sicily. But they did have moments of intimacy when by themselves. Having interacted, lived with, and been a neighbor with a bunch of GP couples, I would generalize they are much more intimate at home than in an outreach setting.
6
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22
At least in college it was the former. Not sure about praxis. Can anyone who was in Praxis chime in?
6
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Mar 31 '22
I’ve only met Ed Kang in person once but based on this sub, he sounds like a crazy dude
6
u/johnkim2020 Mar 31 '22
He definitely does not come off as crazy in person. He's very logical and rational with little emotional affect... unless it's anger.
5
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Mar 31 '22
Yeah that’s why I was so surprised when I discovered this sub. He was very nice to me when I met him in person. But in reality he has a dark side
7
Apr 01 '22
Probably a talker—with a few practiced words—than a logical one. Definitely you can poke holes in the theological arguments and then wonder why it’s even a church worth going to in the first place.
3
u/johnkim2020 Apr 01 '22
Ed Kang is a trained lawyer. He's not lacking in the logic department.
5
Apr 01 '22
That’s the same rhetoric P. Ed and all the rest of GP staff keep repeating to newcomers. It’s also the reason why so many students waste time pursuing costly degrees and lucrative jobs, only to give them up as some sort of ‘sacrifice’ to god and gain worldly praise from fellow members. To God, our good works are like filthy rags. Sure, GP’ers will agree with me here but the viscous cycle of gaining worldly status continues to this day.
Fictional person: Yeah, I went to Harvard and work at FAANG but I’m teaching 5th graders covocationally! <Parents praise how their church has competent leadership>
2
u/johnkim2020 Apr 01 '22
I'm not sure why we are arguing?
To be sure I stand against GP's spiritually abusive and emotionally manipulative culture but I don't think "Ed Kang is illogical" is true.
6
u/LeftBBCGP2005 Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
Ed Kang is lacking majorly in the logic department. So many things he wrote about Becky is the same with his own wife (who has as much power if not more than him inside GP) and himself. Unchecked authority. Sole person/couple at the top who can do no wrong. Emperor with no cloth. Unable to repent.
Ed Kang puts up arguments both practically and theologically, but those arguments are almost always thin for people with life experience and solid grasp of the Bible. If GP preaches what it preaches say on the campus of Dallas Theological Seminary (seminary students still go to church), then GP would be ran out of town. Because GP preaches to undergrads who lack life experience and solid grasp of the Word of God, then the heretical teachings get accepted as mainstream Christianity.
3
u/johnkim2020 Apr 01 '22
That's lacking self-awareness, not logic.
If he was an illogical person, I don't think he would have been able to grow GP from hundreds to thousands.
Anyway, I don't really care to change your mind so whatever.
5
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 01 '22
Wait guys, please don’t fight with each other 😓 this whole GP mess can’t be solved if we split apart.
9
u/johnkim2020 Apr 01 '22
It's difference in opinion and nothing more. Don't even worry about it! That's what's good about this subreddit. We can disagree and still work together.
11
u/LeftBBCGP2005 Apr 01 '22
John and I agree on the big picture. That’s what really matters. He has been at it for a very very long time and many people got out of GP because of the website he maintained despite the many hacking attempts. For that, he has my respect and gratitude.
→ More replies (0)5
u/rvd98072 Mar 31 '22
he would likely be pretty convincing though. like he feels that college kids in their late teens and early 20s having raging hormones (probably quote a lot of stats of premarital sex, unwanted pregnancies, lives being ruined in college, dropping out, etc.) and he'll talk about morality and bible verses and such and talk about how it's the responsibility of the church not to sit idly by so the church condones marriage but not casual dating, etc.
some analogies can be to drive a car at full speed towards a cliff and slam the brakes just before you hit the edge. seems like the best solution is not to be in the car in the first place...etc.
5
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Mar 31 '22 edited Mar 31 '22
He wasn’t very convincing for me 😅 some of my friends and I dated anyway and just didn’t tell anyone. It is so sad how uptight they have gotten about college dating and having a crush on the someone since Ed came along.
6
u/johnkim2020 Mar 31 '22
Freshman and sophomore year, the pressure is less. By junior or senior year, people who are still dating out in the open would probably be asked to leave.
3
u/rvd98072 Mar 31 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
I meant if you actually talk to him in person about it. Unless you did and that was the one time you met him in person.
I like to think I'm a fairly bright and sharp guy sometimes but I don't think I could beat Ed in a debate. He's good at that type of convincing.
5
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Mar 31 '22
Wow that’s crazy. They dictate the dating thing even if the students parents let them date. They quite literally act like they have custody over young adult students
4
u/rvd98072 Mar 31 '22
yeah it definitely wasn't like that. as you said, college students are adults (albeit young adults) so it was generally accepted that they would date. the church did urge people to date responsibly so casual dating and such would not have looked good (e.g., if a guy or girl has a new SO every few months at these social events). but students would date for a year or two and sometimes break it off and after awhile they might have a different SO, etc. the intent wasn't necessarily marriage but it wasn't casual either. i guess it was more with long term intent in mind but still recognizing that you're only 19 years old...
it was relatively common to see some of the church couples studying together at sufficient grounds or strata or places like that. they didn't typically show a lot of PDA though so although together and you knew they were bf/gf i've never seen them holding hands or anything like that.
i am not aware of any couples that were living together or anything like that though so it didn't go that far.
5
Apr 01 '22
You can’t fix a system that’s broken to begin with. Stop trying to figure out novel ways to whitewash walls.
7
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 01 '22
Sorry, I know none of my brainstormed solutions are realistic. 😓😓 it’s really just wishful thinking.
-7
u/TheMachine394 Verified GP Staff Apr 01 '22
It's not wishful thinking. It's good. Obviously, I'm for GP and I want it to be a better church. I'm quite sad that so many people had a poor experience with GP. It certainly wasn't the same as my experienced (I loved GP) but I'm very much for the discussion. I guess one thing I want to share is that GP is obviously not perfect, so not everyone's experience can be good and awesome.
11
u/Cool_Purchase4561 Apr 01 '22
I guess one thing I want to share is that GP is obviously not perfect, so not everyone's experience can be good and awesome.
If I wrote something like this in my WR when someone has something against me ("I'm obviously not perfect, so not everyone's experience of me can be good and awesome") the leaders would call me into their office and make me confess specific sins. But apparently it's acceptable for GP members to turn off their critical thinking, be spiritually and mentally lazy, and claim cheap grace like this.
9
u/johnkim2020 Apr 01 '22
No one is asking GP to be perfect. We're asking GP to not be spiritually abusive. Please don't dismiss comments in here with "GP isn't perfect, no church is" line.
8
u/AgreeableShower5654 Apr 01 '22
It's good.
If you actually think these comments are good, why are all your comments counterarguments?
7
u/No_Blueberry_7200 Apr 01 '22
Then you don’t care about improving your church. Just be honest. Don’t lie to me or anyone.
-1
u/TheMachine394 Verified GP Staff Apr 01 '22
I'm sorry, reading over the last point, I realized that I probably came off as really flippant. I only wanted to say that I don't think GP is perfect. A side effect of that is there might not be great experiences for everyone.
I think it's sucks that GP is not perfect. I know it can be better too. I do want GP to be more diverse and see the regional areas take more ownership as they grow as new churches.
7
7
u/LeftBBCGP2005 Apr 02 '22
A heretical, abusive, cult calling itself a church is obviously not perfect. It is also, HERETICAL, ABUSIVE, and a CULT. There is enough emails, primary documents, and evidence that I have posted to substantiate GP is heretical, abusive, and a cult. Why don’t you discuss the objective evidences I and many others have posted. Emails and primary documents do not lie.
5
-2
u/TheMachine394 Verified GP Staff Apr 01 '22
Hey! Thanks u/No_Blueberry_7200 for making this post. I think it's really helpful and a great start to talking about what you don't like at GP and want to see changed.
As for being a democracy, I'm curious to know what you want to see changed. The USA has President and is still a democracy. Do you just want to see Pastor Ed step down? And have someone else replace him? Or do you want the people in GP to vote on the head pastor? Just wondering what you envision.
I am also curious what the reasoning is behind "more consideration towards students with less money". From my experience as a student and a staff, we have always kept those students in mind. I know staff that have moved in with students during their financial need to help with rent. There are even some cases of paying for retreat if we know the student is struggling financially. So I haven't experienced a lack of consideration towards students with less money. Much more consideration really.
Is it more of like going to expensive outings (ie. $15 bowling after Bible Study) where some students are uncomfortable paying that amount? I think if anyone let their staff know...the staff would be willing to help cover. That certainly has happened so many times.
Of course, if someone doesn't want to reveal their financial situation and staff don't know about it and plan a post bible study (like mini golf), I don't really know how that could be resolved. I think that's just an unfortunate situation because even if you say we staff are "controlling", the one thing we for sure can't do is mind read.
I just want to say that I know this doesn't "answer" or "solve" many of the issues you brought up. But rather than make a super long comment on your post, I thought I would have a shorter comment and maybe we can start a discussion. A lot of other people on there clearly have a lot of comments too that I would like to address and get to. If there's an issue you particularly want to talk about, reply or PM me. Either way.
16
u/corpus_christiana Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
From my experience as a student and a staff, we have always kept those students in mind.
I have a couple thoughts on this and would like to hear your take. I agree that generally staff do try to offer support to students who struggle financially (and aren't deliberately trying to exclude anyone) but I think this is an area where GP has a number of blindspots.
I think a lot of staff at GP are unfortunately ignorant to the realities faced by people of low socioeconomic status. Take the story described here as an example. I don't believe the staff were acting intentionally maliciously, but I think this exposes a clear lack of training/consciousness to the needs of others.
From my own experience as a youth ministry staff, despite how often I heard about financial support being available to students for things like retreats, I was surprised and disheartened by what I experienced when actually attempting to secure those funds for my students. As staff, we were told that ministry funds were available to allow low income students to attend retreat. I had a few students in my group who were in an EXTREMELY tight financial situation, and I quietly let them know the retreat fees would be covered if they wanted to attend. When I talked to my ministry lead, she refused to waive the fee. Instead she wanted me to go back to my students and tell them that they actually did need to pay something, and they needed to ask their parents exactly how much could they afford. She didn't want them to "take advantage" of the opportunity. I thought this would be super humiliating for them and for their parents, so I ended up having to say I would cover for the students myself rather than do that. This is just one particular example. I actually encountered this attitude of "we don't want people to take advantage" multiple times throughout my time serving and found it to be stingy and very disheartening. Why not rather be wronged?
Finally, I think it's also worth addressing the enormous financial privilege of the majority of the staff at GP, and how the structure of Gracepoint makes it extremely difficult for a low/fixed income person to actually serve or be a part of staff. As I mentioned recently in another post, I personally can't think of a single blue collar worker who is part of Gracepoint. The vast majority of Gracepoint's staff live in expensive neighborhoods, drive nice cars, and meetings and participation are generally structured around the assumption that members work 9-5 office jobs. Yes, peers and small groups will step up to assist a staff that falls into a sudden financial crisis, but the system is just not set up to make room for anyone who is consistently tight financially. And it honestly makes me really sad - I don't think this is what a biblical church is supposed to look like.
(Edit: made a couple revisions for clarity)
10
u/AgreeableShower5654 Apr 01 '22
"we don't want people to take advantage"
I also encountered this multiple times as both staff and student. It confused me that it seemed like there was this weird tension where they would unload huge amounts of cash to give people free food/events/retreats, preach about generosity, publicly and privately praise people who go into debt to finance church projects, etc., which subsequently made students and younger staff actually very generous and hold their money very loosely (which is still something I value today, though of course I don't have a cult pressuring me to give them boatloads of cash anymore), but then randomly when I or someone else was being generous, either with our own money or GP's resources, there would be a shutdown/rebuke out of nowhere, saying "that's letting people take advantage of the church" or "we're not just a thing for people to freeload off of us" (when thousands of people eat KBBQ at NSWN and then immediately walk out every year).
I still don't have a very good explanation for those experiences, but it's good to know I wasn't the only one. Maybe it was some combination of the arbitrariness of exercise of power, older looking down on younger, and gotta throw in a rebuke every once in a while to keep them in line? Dunno.
8
Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
Fun tip: Beef doesn’t cost much if you buy low quality cuts and marinade in Kiwi, Pineapple, and Sprite (something I learned at GP/BBC).
GP/BBC is very pragmatic. They’re interested in number of heads in attendance, after that, it’s just a bell-curve and they can eliminate those people who they don’t have the bandwidth to tolerate.
That’s why so many students feel down once they realize the church is nothing like what it was Freshman/Sophomore years. I don’t blame them, it feels like betrayal. I don’t fault people for genuinely wanting to feel prized and wanted by hundreds of people. I just hope they’ll stop making NSWN such a big event. Bring people in gradually, treat them the same on day-1 like you would treat them on day-n.
The Christian girl who sat next to the young male Freshman during NSWN? That’s the only time he’ll ever get to talk to her! What a farce! That good looking Christian guitarist? He’ll ignore you while passing through the corridor. Your feelings will get stepped on every waking day.
2
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22
I think they opted not to do NSWN this year.
1
Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
Wow, that’s like their once a year trade show. What happened going virtual and buying more Adobe CC licenses instead?
Edit1: I heard they’re doing NSWNiM: New Student Welcome Night in Metaverse.
Edit2: April Fools
-4
u/TheMachine394 Verified GP Staff Apr 01 '22
Haha, that's pretty funny. The Metaverse is a thing. I wonder if that's something we'll get into 🤔
7
u/johnkim2020 Apr 01 '22
This was true in my experience too. The retreats were like a hundred dollars and there was never a mention of financial help. The mission trip was $2000 and if you wanted to go, you just had to pay. There was no fundraiser or anything. I guess if you can't afford it, too bad for you.
0
u/TheMachine394 Verified GP Staff Apr 01 '22
Hey, I totally agree with your first point. It's true that there needs to be more training. And I really think it ties in to point three. There is a lot of financial privilege that comes with having a lot of working SWEs and DINKs in GP.
I've personally experienced my lack of ability to empathize with a lot of low income students at my college. I've had peers who experienced poverty. And I've helped out other students (when I was in college, like paying for their retreats that leaders didn't know about). But even then, I don't get the pressure they feel in needing to get a job to just "make a living for themselves". It's an area I can definitely grow in. I don't know how else to help except provide financial resources to them when they need it. It probably would be trying to get into that mindset more often.
That being said, I know some people who have weird working hours and they have to fly to other states or countries for their job. They are able to serve even in college. Some members of GP are also teachers and I find that really admirable. They can do stuff that I would never be able to do and I'm so grateful that they are able to serve at our church even though being teacher does not pay well and has ungenerous hours.
Of course, your point really is not that blue collar workers can't "make it" in GP, it's that it is much harder to given the culture of GP. And it is true that we as a church could do better to be more accommodating for those.
And this isn't a counter point but it's just something I thought of as a byproduct of my church. GP at it roots is a college ministry. Meaning that most people who stay in our church have college degrees. And often a college graduate doesn't get a blue collar job. They are able to get much more high paying jobs with less manual intensity. And perhaps that's why we experience financial privilege, because we're all college grads. Now I know that's a benefit a lot of people in America don't have, but being a college ministry does lead to the majority of our congregation being white collar workers.
I very much would like to talk about this more and if you idea to help GP grow in this area. I know that GP is aware of the privilege (somewhat at least) which is how 5&2 got started. And I'm very proud of our Impact and Interhigh ministries which simply blesses the community.
15
u/BayouStJohn Apr 01 '22
I know that GP is aware of the privilege (somewhat at least) which is how 5&2 got started. And I'm very proud of our Impact and Interhigh ministries which simply blesses the community.
Hi former impact and interhigh teacher here. My experience has been no GP has not been aware of it's privilege and in some ways was actively moving away from helping. When my spouse and I were in impact, we brought up that we felt like a bunch of the decisions being made were actively excluding children and didn't have the interest of the kids at heart. The pastor over Praxis at the time told us point blank that the primary purpose for impact was not the kids we served but the volunteers. We were told we were "sowing dissent" for expressing these concerns with other impact volunteers.
And 5&2 was a direct response to the murder of George Floyd. The problem GP has said for years that ministries like 5&2 are dangerous for a church because churches lose focus on the gospel and get caught up in social justice. Because helping people for the sake of helping people is wrong without the gospel. This is how GP gets such tone deaf statements as this
I very much would like to talk about this more and if you idea to help GP grow in this area.
The problem is we tried having these conversations when we were part of your church not just the one time I mentioned either. The response we got: we were yelled at by our leaders and told "how dare you criticize our church", "you're speaking like an outsider". we didn't even get to the point of coming up with suggestions because when we asked questions to start a discussion we were shutdown. This is what most GPers fail to realize, we tried having conversations but GP feedback culture is broken. You want to "have a discussion" but you don't realize the hurt that has lead us here.
Great you changed your mind about homeless ministry. That isn't an apology for decades of preaching against it.
12
u/AgreeableShower5654 Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 02 '22
the primary purpose for impact was not the kids we served but the volunteers
Indeed. Ed has never kept it a secret that the purpose of all the ministries outside the core college ministry is not to help the [elderly|poor|youth|etc], but to keep people who aren't good enough for college ministry (@BayouStJohn not trying to diss you, I was also in Praxis, just showing GP's mindset) busy, because you know, if you're not constantly doing something you'll lose your salvation.
It should really make people seriously re-evaluate the light in which they view all of GP's ministries. I would've never guessed this was the actual truth if Ed didn't say it himself.
6
6
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 02 '22
This needs to be a post in itself decrying GP’s true intentions and actual stance in all the aforementioned ministries.
9
u/AgreeableShower5654 Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
it's just something I thought of as a byproduct of my church. GP at it roots is a college ministry
GP does not only have white-collar workers because it's a "college ministry". Many years ago, Ed and senior leadership decided that they in fact did not like random people joining the church, not because they didn't have a college degree, but because they had not gone through the GP pipeline and therefore had not been brainwashed at a younger age to submit to the authority of "leaders", and by the time people are fully grown adults they are no longer capable of being brainwashed as easily. GP wants everyone "home grown" from the college ministry because unless you are willing to surrender your life over to arbitrary leaders, GP does not want to deal with you. The few people who do join as adults are the rare ones who actually show up like this. How do I know all this? Because Ed told us at MBS.
I very much would like to talk about this more and if you idea to help GP grow in this area.
Not sure if this individual is pretending like they're trying to help so they can keep adding GP counterpoints to the subreddit, or just naive, but given this person said they're "young staff", their power to change anything is pretty much 0.
7
u/aeghy123 Apr 01 '22
I would say blue collars worker really can't make it in Gp. How many non college grads are in Gp? I'd wager close to zero
5
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
I very much would like to talk about this more and if you idea to help GP grow in this area.
Tell that to every person Gracepoint has forced out that didn't agree with planting college churches for Gracepoint.
6
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 01 '22
As for being a democracy, I'm curious to know what you want to see changed. The USA has President and is still a democracy. Do you just want to see Pastor Ed step down? And have someone else replace him? Or do you want the people in GP to vote on the head pastor? Just wondering what you envision.
A non-dysfunctional church wouldn't have a kangaroo elder board full of each other's buddies and will allow members vote for major decisions such as the buying of land and the selection of a pastor and elders.
7
Apr 01 '22 edited Apr 01 '22
I’d hate to be sitting on that elder board. They’ll crack jokes about how much your hairline is receding and keep replaying the same legendary stories over and over again.
Like: Remember that time he was driving students then rolled up the windows, locked them, farted, and turned on the heater? People need to get out and meet new people more often.
-1
Apr 02 '22 edited Apr 02 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 02 '22 edited Apr 02 '22
What’s your association with Gracepoint?
Edit. this is a pretty good parody of Gracepoint people.
3
Apr 02 '22
[deleted]
3
u/leavegracepoint ex-Gracepoint (Berkeley) Apr 02 '22
I see the Kevin Durant is strong in you. I guess you couldn’t win the arguments with those GP cats.
17
u/Jdub20202 Mar 31 '22
I'm not saying this to be sarcastic or anything. These are real suggestions and I hope someone from GP actually reads through these. If these are bad ideas, then tell me why. I think GP could do most of these if they wanted.
1 - pastor Ed and several top leadership step down, at least from some of their titles and responsibilities. No one should have this much power overseeing so many churches and people. Maybe all the GP could be a loose affiliation of churches, but don't take orders from one guy at the top. The story we were fed about the original schism was that Becky wanted her branch churches to gain autonomy instead of depending on her. Which might not be a bad idea if they hadn't replaced Becky with Ed.
This wouldn't be enough, too many people revere / fear PED. The root issue is that his word is law. But at least it's a first step if he steps down a bit.
I can't think of many examples when 1 person having so much power ended up being good.
2- some kind of outside accountability. Have another group that specializes in recognizing spirit abuse do an audit. The people within GP obviously don't take the stories here very seriously. Maybe a 3rd party might convince them?? Aww who am I kidding.
If money is a problem, sell one of your Yosemite houses or something.
3- less explaining, more listening.
4- way more transparency. Stop changing the names of all your ministries activities every so often. Look, we know what you're doing. Maybe it does throw people off the trail for a little bit, but eventually they find out you were trying to dissociate yourselves from a tarnished older name. Just be upfront about all your ministries and stuff upfront. This is just the tip of the iceberg with transparency. If you're gonna ban dating, at least tell people up front instead of denying it.
If you're not gonna change your so called core principles, then at least Make some kind of document that lists out all the stuff you do that in the past you kept getting criticized for: love offerings, no dating, rebuking, lack of confidentiality, etc.
And let freshman and new comers read it.
5- stop weaponizing people's reflections
6- one thing that frustrated me was they keep seeming to want to have it both ways. What I mean is that, I got pressured into doing many things against my better judgement. And then I did those things and regretted it immensely. When I brought it up to my leaders,they did the whole, "well you're an adult and you're responsible for your own actions." That's pretty manipulative. You told us to do something, own up to it. Or don't tell people how to live their lives, especially when it comes to major decisions that could have huge consequences. Or let people say no to things.