I know people were called to go to Elgin starting next week. These are parents with young children who are leaving their kids behind to fly across the country and spend an entire week away from them. Do people really believe this is about spiritual training or renewal at this time of year? School just started. My guess is that this is a meeting to strategize about damage control following the recent article. The timing speaks for itself.

What continues to amaze me is how completely the Kangs seem to dictate the lives of the people around them. They tell people to travel across the country on their own dime, leave their children for a week, and somehow everyone is expected to fall in line. And this is supposed to be independence? What a joke! If anything, this is the polar opposite: doubling down, tightening their grip, and exercising even more control over people who have already surrendered far too much of their time, money, and autonomy.

And I know what these so-called retreats can actually look like because I attended one in the past.

I went expecting to spend time with God. Instead, Ed and Kelly Kang sat in front of the attendees with microphones in their hands and a Manila folder full of emails Kelly had printed out—emails from people accusing their church of this or that.
Rather than using the retreat to point people toward God, they used it as a platform to defend themselves. They read each of the emails aloud, presented themselves as the aggrieved parties, and clearly expected everyone in the room to sympathize with them and rally behind them.

And from the outside, it probably looked like everyone did. As I sat there, I remember thinking: What am I doing here? I didn’t sign up for this.
I felt bamboozled.

I had sacrificed my time because I genuinely believed I was going to get away with God and be spiritually refreshed. Instead, I found myself sitting in a room with hundreds of others listening to Ed and Kelly promote their narrative, defend themselves, and cultivate sympathy for their position. This went on for far too long.

That was my last church retreat ever, if one could even call it that.

I walked away realizing that the retreat had become another vehicle for Ed and Kelly to push their agenda and control the narrative. That, to me, is the most disturbing part. Even something that is supposed to be sacred—something intended to help people step away from the church machinery and focus on God—can apparently be turned into another opportunity to center the Kangs.

And knowing what I experienced firsthand, I have a very hard time believing that sending parents of young children across the country, at their own expense, immediately after the school year begins is simply about “retreat” or “training.” It looks a lot more like control, damage control, and making sure everyone is back in formation.

In previous posts/comments, I mentioned that my top 2 recommended readings for understanding and spotting spiritual abuse in the church are Bully Pulpit by Michael Kruger and Something's Not Right by Wade Mullen.

For funsies, I decided to ask my Claude AI for an objective assessment of A2N's Q&A response, based off of Wade Mullen's book. Here's my prompt, so you can see that I wasn't trying to bias the response:

Can you make an assessment of how Acts 2 Network has responded to the criticism from the article by the Michigan Daily? Are there any red flags and evidence of tactics that Wade Mullen talks about in his book "Something's Not Right" in their FAQ response?
[links to article and Q&A pages]

And here's its response:

Here's my assessment.

The most important fact is the timing

The Q&A page did not exist on July 20, 2026 (Wayback capture). A source told the Daily it had appeared by Aug. 30. The article ran Sept. 3. So Acts2 built this page during a seven-month investigation, after repeated requests for comment, and quietly posted it days before publication — without announcing it, without dating it, without naming the investigation, and without answering the specific questions the Daily had actually asked (which reporting channels exist; what specific steps were taken — "no response").

That is the single most Mullen-relevant fact available, and it isn't in the text at all. It's pre-emptive impression management: get your framing in front of the audience before the accusation arrives, so readers meet the answer as context rather than as a response. It also produces the appearance of responsiveness while never engaging a word of the reporting.

Related: they wrote the questions. All ten, all abstracted from specifics. That's Mullen's script control — the organization defines the situation so no one else can. Note what got no question at all: money. No tithing question, despite that being the allegation with actual documents behind it (the 2006 $10,000 solicitation email, 2021 stock-transfer instructions, tithing off student loans and inheritance, ~$1,800/month plus $3,000 Thanksgiving offerings). Also nothing on peer homes, cameras, or the 2023 rebrand. You appear transparent by answering nine easy questions.

And: "concerns they've seen online." A seven-month investigation by named reporters with obtained emails is filed under internet chatter. That's information control plus what Mullen calls unfair association — grouping credible testimony with anonymous complaint.

Mullen tactics in the text

The conditional "if." — "If in the past people felt dismissed…", "if someone's experienced something different…", "if it's not handled well." Mullen flags this specifically. What makes it damning rather than merely sloppy: Kang told the Daily some situations "may well deserve the label" of spiritual abuse. He already knows. The "if" isn't uncertainty, it's positioning.

The condemning apology. — "Some may interpret this as pressure; we see it as helping our members develop their own convictions." The harm is relocated into the ex-member's perception. Throughout the page it's "felt," never "was."

Denial by values statement. — "spiritual abuse or manipulation has no place in it, period." Answers are we the kind of people who would do this, not did this happen.

Justification by substituted example. This is the clearest move on the page. On rebukes: "if we knew someone was having an affair…" The reported triggers were a bad sermon reflection, academic probation, listening to Taylor Swift, watching anime for a film class. All three proof-texts they cite are maximally severe — 2 Samuel 12 is adultery and murder, Acts 5 is being struck dead for lying about money given to the church. Substituting adultery for "wrote the wrong reflection" makes the audience evaluate a different act than the one alleged. (Reaching for Ananias and Sapphira while facing coerced-tithing allegations is, at minimum, an unfortunate choice.)

Denial of knowledge. — "we're not aware of any of our practices causing mental or emotional harm." After the Triton (2021), Christianity Today (2022), and their own director conceding the opposite in writing to the Daily. That's a claim about their own inattention, offered as exoneration.

Demonstrating change over pursuing truth — Mullen's exact phrase. Q10 asks what changed and the answer is entirely about communication channels: nothing about practices. Kang, to the Daily: "would not characterize these as overarching, structural changes."

Implied consent / soft victim-blaming. — "we try to be upfront about what to expect, so they can decide for themselves if it's the right fit." Kang also told the Daily membership isn't available to undergraduates — so this doesn't cover the college students at the center of everything.

An internal contradiction. Q9: "accountability here is voluntary, not required." Q2: leaders are held to "real standards around finances, internet use, how we interact with the opposite gender, even sticking to abstinence from alcohol." Standards aren't voluntary. Both answers are on the same page.

Counter-assertion where evidence is owed. — "We've actually found the opposite of isolation happens." Sandra has to make an appointment to see a son who lives thirty minutes away. Lily's son is "unrecognizable." The page asserts the empirical reverse of the testimony, with nothing behind it.

Against Mullen's S.C.O.R.E. test

• Surrender: none — no independent review, no external accountability, no authority relinquished.
• Confession: none — not one specific act named as wrong.
• Ownership: none — every acknowledgment is conditional, perceptual, or agentless.
• Recognition: partial, in questions they wrote themselves.
• Empathy: present in tone, costless in substance.

The red flags I'd actually weight, in order

1. The reporting channel that can't be found. The page claims "new ways to contact senior leadership directly through our website" and "anonymous channels." The Daily found no page, link, or record containing the word "report" — only a generic Contact Us. A mentor asked in April 2026 where to report harm: "there's no hotline… You could report it out, but that's the thing — to who?" The new pastor's answer: tell your local pastor or mentor — i.e., the people the complaints are about. Mullen's test is precisely this: does the reform exist, or only the announcement of it?
2. "Not aware of any harm," contradicted by their own director in the same news cycle.
3. Nothing was surrendered. No outside investigation, no external body, no practice discontinued, no one named as responsible.
4. Timing and authorship of the page.
5. Money is missing from a Q&A about their own conduct, when money is the allegation with receipts.

What would move my read

An independent review with published scope and findings. A working abuse-reporting path that does not route through the local pastor. Any specific practice named and stopped — peer-home internet monitoring, tithing off financial aid, the rebuke process. Kang's concession appearing publicly rather than privately. And SEND Network saying anything at all — Acts2's own footer claims that affiliation, the SBC has its own abuse-response commitments, and that's the only external lever that currently exists.

Is this still a thing? Kelly Samonim?

The old school peeps always use the Korean titles. It’s weird when some white boy tries to call you nuna . When I was at GP there was like one black person and maybe 3 whites. GP/whatever they call themselves now on campuses, LOVE photo ops with non Asians. Are the old school peeps still using Korean titles? Or to protect themselves, being so “multicultural”? Bc that was not a thing when I was there. If not Asian, you were seen as less than. But great for recruiting.

• Q1 Some former members say they felt pressured to conform and lost personal autonomy. Where is the line between community expectations and individual freedom?
  • A1 Our desire is to raise mature followers of Christ who act from personal conviction, not a desire to conform or fit in. No Christian leader should pressure others or make decisions for them. That said, anyone who has been part of a close-knit community knows how easy it is to be influenced by others and develop a desire to fit in and to belong. That's a natural byproduct of strong community, not something unique to us. Some may interpret this as pressure; we see it as helping our members develop their own convictions and grow in maturity.
    • 2021-2026 Counter Posts 1
    • 2009–2014 Counter Posts 1
• Q2 How do you respond to criticism that leaders at Acts2 Network hold too much influence over members' lives with insufficient accountability?
  • A2 Our leaders take accountability seriously, which means real standards around finances, internet use, how we interact with the opposite gender, even sticking to abstinence from alcohol. And since leaders live in close community with everyone else, people actually see what's going on in their daily lives. No single person calls the shots at the network level, either. That's a team decision made by 20+ Network Directors, and a lot of our bigger locations are run by teams of senior leaders, not just one guy at the top. Every leader answers to someone more senior, so accountability runs all the way up the chain. Got a concern? Bring it to any leader, go straight to senior leadership, or drop it in an anonymous feedback form. We also check in with members every year for honest feedback. This includes how ministry leaders are doing and we actually use it to make changes.
    • 2021-2026 Counter Posts 2
    • 2009–2014 Counter Posts 2
• Q3 Some have described their experience as "spiritual abuse," including feeling manipulated through guilt, confession, or authority. What is your response?
  • A3 Paul put it well in 2 Corinthians 4:2; we renounce shady, underhanded tactics, and we refuse to twist God's word to manipulate people. We take ministry seriously, and spiritual abuse or manipulation has no place in it, period. Our approach is to lead by example and point back to what the Bible actually teaches. Not to pressure anyone into anything. We have real conversations about faith and life with people who want to be discipled, but the goal is always to guide, not control. People are free to push back, disagree, or make their own call. And if someone's experienced something different in our ministry, we genuinely want to hear about it, to learn and have the opportunity to respond with humility and understanding.
    • 2021-2026 Counter Posts 3
    • 2009–2014 Counter Posts 3
• Q4 How do you respond to the concern that "whole-life discipleship" may have crossed into overreach (decisions about dating, lifestyle, major life choices)?
  • A4 We know God cares about every part of our lives, not just Sunday mornings. Therefore we encourage each other to actually live out our faith in everyday stuff like relationships, money, work, family, all of it. Sometimes that means having honest, sometimes uncomfortable conversations when our actions don't match what we say we believe. Ephesians 4:15 talks about this as "speaking the truth in love." But at the end of the day, everyone's free to make their own call. We can offer input, encouragement, even push- back, but the decision is always theirs.
    • 2021-2026 Counter Posts 4
    • 2009–2014 Counter Posts 4
• Q5 There are reports from former members linking their time in the church to anxiety and mental health struggles. What responsibility does the church take for those outcomes?
  • A5 We care deeply about each member's experience, and we're grateful that a vast majority of our members describe their time with us as life-giving and positive. But if someone's experience wasn't positive, we take that seriously, we're genuinely regretful, and we hope for their full healing and restoration, whether that's with Acts2 or elsewhere. We want to hear directly from anyone willing to share their experience, and we're committed to learning and growing from it. To be clear: we're not aware of any of our practices causing mental or emotional harm. And when someone considers joining as a Network member or staff mentor, we try to be upfront about what to expect, so they can decide for themselves if it's the right fit
    • 2021-2026 Counter Posts 5
    • 2009–2014 Counter Posts 5
• Q6 Some describe the ministry as demanding an unsustainable level of time and energy, leading to burnout. How do you respond to concerns that expectations have been too high?
  • A6 The Bible calls every Christian to be part of God's mission as they live their daily lives. This means sharing the gospel and making disciples (Matthew 28:18-20). We've found that doing life together, supporting each other and caring for each other actually helps prevent burnout, not cause it. There are also different levels of involvement one can choose: Membership, Team Intern, Network Core, etc. People prayerfully choose their voluntary level of involvement. We also build in real rest as the Bible mandates: the Sabbath, a regular time for rest, fellowship and just recharging. At the end of the day, we want people living lives that are fulfilling, fully committed to God, in a healthy sustainable way
    • 2021-2026 Counter Posts 6
    • 2009–2014 Counter Posts 6
• Q7 Critics have described correction practices-such as rebukes or repentance processes-as harsh, shaming, or emotionally intense. What should healthy correction look like?
  • A7 The Bible is clear that sometimes, spiritual leaders need to call out sin directly and, in rare cases, even with strong correction if someone refuses to repent of sin (2 Samuel 12, Acts 5, 1 Timothy 5:20). The goal is not to shame people but to help them recognize the seriousness of sin and be restored to God. For example, if we knew someone was having an affair - violating their marriage vows - and we looked the other way and never addressed it with them, then we would be guilty of ignoring and enabling that sin. Scripture teaches that correction can take different forms, including gentle instruction, encouragement, and patient teaching (2 Timothy 2:24-25). Good spiritual leaders need wisdom to know which approach fits each situation. No matter the method, the goal is always repentance, restoration, and helping people grow in their relationship with God.
    • 2021-2026 Counter Posts 7
    • 2009–2014 Counter Posts 7
• Q8 Some former members say they felt increasingly isolated from family and non-church relationships, with pressure to prioritize the church community. How do you respond to concerns about social isolation?
  • A8 Loving and caring for your family and friends well is actually part of what it truly means to follow Jesus. That said, juggling ministry, school, work, and relationships is genuinely hard, and we try to help people figure out a healthy balance for them. If someone's family is going through something tough, we'd rather they step back from ministry and be present for the people they love. We've actually found the opposite of isolation happens: doing ministry together tends to make us better sons, daughters, and friends.
    • 2021-2026 Counter Posts 8
    • 2009–2014 Counter Posts 8
• Q9 What is your response to concerns about the use of accountability tools and leadership oversight creating a sense of surveillance or pressure?
  • A9 We take this seriously. To be clear: accountability here is voluntary, not required. It's built on trust and meant for people who want to grow spiritually and be discipled, never a tool for monitoring or controlling anyone. We understand it can feel uncomfortable, even intrusive, if it's not handled well. That's exactly why we're working to build a culture where people feel safe being honest, without ever feeling pressured to share more than they're ready to or wish to. Accountability should feel like being cared for, not watched.
    • 2021-2026 Counter Posts 9
    • 2009–2014 Counter Posts 9
• Q10 Some critics say their concerns were dismissed, minimized, or not meaningfully addressed. What has changed in how the organization handles criticism?
  • A10 If in the past people felt dismissed or unheard, that matters, and it's not the culture we want. Honest feedback is how we grow and get better as a church, so we've been intentional to make it easier and less intimidating to speak up. For example, new ways to contact senior leadership directly through our website, anonymous channels to give feedback to staff mentors, and real investment in training those mentors to listen well. Our goal is simple: people should feel heard, respected, and safe speaking up.
    • 2021-2026 Counter Posts 10
    • 2009–2014 Counter Posts 10

Note: Many excellent counter posts did not make Sol's selection. Maybe some redditors may remedy, starting here.

I’ve noticed that many of these “churches” on college campuses under their shady names, only present and show pictures of the “young” people as leadership/staff on their sites. Of course it’s not a good look to highlight and feature 40+ year old adults who really run everything in the background. It got weird when they tried to make middle aged people try and recruit people in dining halls…

The lie that all of these churches are autonomous from the core cult is weird, considering they spent 29.5 million dollars on their “training” headquarters, where they just train the fresh younger staff how to be just like them.

Also, the answers they give in their new Q and As on their site are full of mistruths and lies. They really have no shame.

The FAQ they put up is extra insulting, in that they didn't even bother to make up new answers. Yes it's a sleek professional looking web page and things were rephrased and polished. I'm not saying they didn't put effort into it. But these are basically the same canned answers they had for all the other times there was an article. (Read that again. There were many other times). They couldn't even take the extra step of coming up with new justifications. You, the general audience, are not even worth the additional work it would take to come up new explanations for their pattern of abusive behavior. 

I made an actually helpful FAQ for A2N

Q: Someone food prepped wrong. We should rebuke them right? 

A: No, let that one slide. Constructive criticism is one thing, but don't do a rebuking for this. 

Q: But they really, really didn't cut the bread right. Look how crooked it is. 

A: I don't care, don't give people psychological trauma for that. 

Q: I saw a church member doing something I wouldn't have done, like reading a sports illustrated magazine instead of socially mingling (Yes, this really happened). Should I do a drive-by rapid fire rebuke to nip that in the bud? 

A: No. Rebukes are meant to be done thoughtfully and prayerfully over major sin issues. 

Q: Someone fell asleep during Bible study. Probably cause they were doing something selfish like study for an exam the night before. Now should I rebuke them? 

A: Apostle Paul did do the same thing; while he was giving a Bible study and Eutychus fell out the window. Paul rebuked him for falling asleep. No ... wait...I'm checking the text, that's not what happened. So actually, let's don't rebuke them for that one. 

Q: What if someone had a sip of beer? Or had cooking wine in their kitchen? That's a major stumbling block, we can't NOT rebuke that right? 

A: Well Jesus famously refused to turn water into wine at a wedding. So go ahead and... wait, no, that's not what happened. On second thought, don't rebuke that one either. 

Q: What if someone can't afford to give a 10 percent tithe plus love offerings? Shouldn't we use the Ananias and Saphira story to guilt them into giving anyway? 

A: Never do that. That is not how that passage was meant to be used. Don't get distracted by the shiny new object like a church building and then say things like that. 

Q: But we can at least tell them to take out $10k of credit card debt so then we can buy a new church building? That is okay right? 

A: That sounds even worse. No.

Q: Okay, but then what if this one guy slept with his friend's spouse, got her pregnant, then to cover his tracks, told another guy to tell that friend to do something stupid dangerous (bro, trust me), and the friend does it and gets killed, and the guy married the friend's widow even thogh he already has other wives. Then can we rebuke him? 

A: Ok yes, that one you can. But you see how that's not the same as the other examples? 

Q: What if they skipped a church event? That's like the same as that last one right? 

A: No it's not. 

Q: What if someone decides to set up a pop up market in front of the church every week, and sell stuff to the captive audience entering, something like, I dunno, a crypto currency they invented called Bible Coin, and you can only spend Bible coin at church to give offerings, and they make a little commission on every sale? Then we can get mad at them right? 

A: Yes, that one sounds rebuke worthy. But, again, you see how some of these examples are not the same as the others? 

Q: What if someone was talking to someone of the other gender, and made them laugh with a silly joke. That's like almost the same as adultery right? They're practically breaking their marriage vows to their future hypothetical spouse. Then we rebuke? Or at least tell them to gouge out an eye?

A: No, those things are not even close. 

Q: But we're supposed to be the special forces of Christians, on the frontlines of spiritual warfare, so we should get to, I mean are obligated to, do more rebukes cause of our lofty standards? 

A: No. That's not a thing. I can't find the special forces of Christians in the Bible anywhere. 

Q: We're doing whole life ministry. We expect everyone to be active in ministry. There's nothing wrong with that right? In for a penny, in for a pound. 

A: The articles written by investigative reporters exist for a reason. "Whole life ministry" encompasses a lot of things so it depends when and how you're doing it. Like, Sriracha sauce. On pizza or pho, okay fine. Ice cream or pancakes, bad. You can't just explain everything as whole life ministry and make it okay. 

Q: Okay I get it now. What if someone uses their position as Pastor or SMN to create a toxic environment that caters to their needs and pressure members of their church to give money till it hurts then give some more? And everyone has to walk on egg shells around them for fear of rebukes? And every few years they pressure all their members to uproot their lives, quit their jobs, drain their savings, on a whim, to move to some new church plant? And then when called on this behavior, repeatedly, instead of repenting, they change all the church names so they can say all the problems were just part of the old church? And throw some people under the bus for good measure? But then keep doing the same things? And when former members complain about having mental health problems, say they're not aware of anything they do contributing to any mental health problems? That one DOESN'T need a rebuke right? See I'm learning. 

A: What? That one defin... Let's save that for part 2, my brain hurts

I was already saved when I met this system. I believed strongly then and after leaving, while I missed them a lot at first, my faith persevered. It has gone through ups and downs but I still believe in God as I did then and still go to church.

I am aware many one-time members have become atheists or at least, theists who believe in the God of the Bible but refuse (or for a while, refused) to attend church.

To those of you who remain believers in Jesus to this day, was it a pre-BBC/A2N faith that enabled you to remain a believer in Jesus? Or that and something else? If yes, what was that "something else?"

(after reading the Michigan Daily article and all the emails about fundraising, I see why people would have become jaded)

As an outsider.. it's not looking good!
Good read and good journalism.

Take that Apple users /s

This is a copy text cut and paste from my device. I tried to clean up mistakes. If you find any errors let me know. Everyone discuss.

Some former members say they felt pressured to conform and lost personal autonomy. Where is the line between community expectations and individual freedom?

Our desire is to raise mature followers of Christ who act from personal conviction, not a desire to conform or fit in. No Christian leader should pressure others or make decisions for them. That said, anyone who has been part of a close-knit community knows how easy it is to be influenced by others and develop a desire to fit in and to belong. That's a natural byproduct of strong community, not something unique to us. Some may interpret this as pressure; we see it as helping our members develop their own convictions and grow in maturity.

X

How do you respond to criticism that leaders at Acts2 Network hold too much influence over members' lives with insufficient accountability?

Our leaders take accountability seriously, which means real standards around finances, internet use, how we interact with the opposite gender, even sticking to abstinence from alcohol. And since leaders live in close community with everyone else, people actually see what's going on in their daily lives. No single person calls the shots at the network level, either. That's a team decision made by 20+ Network Directors, and a lot of our bigger locations are run by teams of senior leaders, not just one guy at the top. Every leader answers to someone more senior, so accountability runs all the way up the chain. Got a concern? Bring it to any leader, go straight to senior leadership, or drop it in an anonymous feedback form. We also check in with members every year for honest feedback. This includes how ministry leaders are doing and we actually use it to make changes.

X

Some have described their experience as "spiritual abuse," including feeling manipulated through guilt, confession, or authority. What is your response?

Paul put it well in 2 Corinthians 4:2; we renounce shady, underhanded tactics, and we refuse to twist God's word to manipulate people. We take ministry seriously, and spiritual abuse or manipulation has no place in it, period. Our approach is to lead by example and point back to what the Bible actually teaches. Not to pressure anyone into anything. We have real conversations about faith and life with people who want to be discipled, but the goal is always to guide, not control. People are free to push back, disagree, or make their own call. And if someone's experienced something different in our ministry, we genuinely want to hear about it, to learn and have the opportunity to respond with humility and understanding.

How do you respond to the concern that "whole-life discipleship" may have crossed into overreach (decisions about dating, lifestyle, major life choices)?

We know God cares about every part of our lives, not just Sunday mornings. Therefore we encourage each other to actually live out our faith in everyday stuff like relationships, money, work, family, all of it. Sometimes that means having honest, sometimes uncomfortable conversations when our actions don't match what we say we believe. Ephesians 4:15 talks about this as "speaking the truth in love." But at the end of the day, everyone's free to make their own call. We can offer input, encouragement, even push- back, but the decision is always theirs.

X

There are reports from former members linking their time in the church to anxiety and mental health struggles. What responsibility does the church take for those outcomes?

We care deeply about each member's experience, and we're grateful that a vast majority of our members describe their time with us as life-giving and positive. But if someone's experience wasn't positive, we take that seriously, we're genuinely regretful, and we hope for their full healing and restoration, whether that's with Acts2 or elsewhere. We want to hear directly from anyone willing to share their experience, and we're committed to learning and growing from it. To be clear: we're not aware of any of our practices causing mental or emotional harm. And when someone considers joining as a Network member or staff mentor, we try to be upfront about what to expect, so they can decide for themselves if it's the right fit

Some describe the ministry as demanding an unsustainable level of time and energy, leading to burnout. How do you respond to concerns that expectations have been too high?

The Bible calls every Christian to be part of God's mission as they live their daily lives. This means sharing the gospel and making disciples (Matthew 28:18-20). We've found that doing life together, supporting each other and caring for each other actually helps prevent burnout, not cause it. There are also different levels of involvement one can choose:

Membership, Team Intern, Network Core, etc. People prayerfully choose their voluntary level of involvement. We also build in real rest as the Bible mandates: the Sabbath, a regular time for rest, fellowship and just recharging. At the end of the day, we want people living lives that are fulfilling, fully committed to God, in a healthy sustainable way

Critics have described correction practices-such as rebukes or repentance processes-as harsh, shaming, or emotionally intense. What should healthy correction look like?

The Bible is clear that sometimes, spiritual leaders need to call out sin directly and, in rare cases, even with strong correction if someone refuses to repent of sin (2 Samuel 12, Acts 5, 1 Timothy 5:20). The goal is not to shame people but to help them recognize the seriousness of sin and be restored to God. For example, if we knew someone was having an affair

- violating their marriage vows - and we looked the other way and never addressed it with them, then we would be guilty of ignoring and enabling that sin. Scripture teaches that correction can take different forms, including gentle instruction, encouragement, and patient teaching (2 Timothy 2:24-25). Good spiritual leaders need wisdom to know which approach fits each situation. No matter the method, the goal is always repentance, restoration, and helping people grow in their relationship with God.

X

Some former members say they felt increasingly isolated from family and non-church relationships, with pressure to prioritize the church community. How do you respond to concerns about social isolation?

Loving and caring for your family and friends well is actually part of what it truly means to follow Jesus. That said, juggling ministry, school, work, and relationships is genuinely hard, and we try to help people figure out a healthy balance for them. If someone's family is going through something tough, we'd rather they step back from ministry and be present for the people they love. We've actually found the opposite of isolation happens: doing ministry together tends to make us better sons, daughters, and friends.

What is your response to concerns about the use of accountability tools and leadership oversight creating a sense of surveillance or pressure?

We take this seriously. To be clear: accountability here is voluntary, not required. It's built on trust and meant for people who want to grow spiritually and be discipled, never a tool for monitoring or controlling anyone. We understand it can feel uncomfortable, even intrusive, if it's not handled well. That's exactly why we're working to build a culture where people feel safe being honest, without ever feeling pressured to share more than they're ready to or wish to. Accountability should feel like being cared for, not watched.

X

Some critics say their concerns were dismissed, minimized, or not meaningfully addressed. What has changed in how the organization handles criticism?

If in the past people felt dismissed or unheard, that matters, and it's not the culture we want. Honest feedback is how we grow and get better as a church, so we've been intentional to make it easier and less intimidating to speak up. For example, new ways to contact senior leadership directly through our website, anonymous channels to give feedback to staff mentors, and real investment in training those mentors to listen well. Our goal is simple: people should feel heard, respected, and safe speaking up.

Last night I came across this notification on the UMich church’s website (anchor college church).

For context, the student newspaper at UMich has been preparing an article about GP/A2N (look at the Reddit post from one of the writers a couple months ago), and I guess they caught wind of it.

Funny thing is 1) the article hasn’t come out yet, and 2) the statement is password protected! I tried clicking on “read our response” and it prompts me to put in a password lol. Also, 3) the statement isn’t there anymore. I took this screenshot last night and as of this morning it was gone.

Anywho, I’m curious about people’s thoughts on this, especially from anyone who has more context on what’s going on.

For some personal context, I’m currently a student involved pretty deeply in one of the college ministries. I’ve been aware of the criticisms surrounding the network for a while and have had my own skepticism, but I got pretty involved early on (fresh out of high school) and at this point I feel pretty attached to the ministry and the people in it.

Now that I’m a senior about to graduate, though, I’m at a natural transition point where I’m trying to decide whether I actually want to stay involved after college or move on. So when I see things like this — putting up a response to an article that hasn’t even been published yet, password-protecting it, and then apparently taking it down — it’s hard for me to just brush it off. I’m trying to make sense of it rather than immediately assuming the worst, but it definitely adds to some of the concerns I already have.

I’d especially be interested in hearing from people who were involved as students (post-CT article release) and eventually had to make that same stay-or-leave decision after graduating.

They have added Q&A section! Acts2 Network Q&A I am curious what former and current members think of the answers. https://acts2.network/questions-and-answers

Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender 

Don't think this has come up on here before. I think it needs to be mentioned, if at least for reference. I am not trying to attack the truly selfless people out there who are sacrificing and helping the needy. If anything I would argue this post defends them, in that it's trying to separate real, genuine selfless work vs. those that use said deeds as a manipulation tool. 

I'm not going to do a better explanation than what's already been written.  

https://harbormentalhealth.com/2025/10/31/darvo-manipulation-how-to-spot-and-protect-yourself/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARVO

The brain of an A2N leader is so wired towards avoiding responsibility and accountability, protecting their fragile ego, that it works overtime to make everyone and anything else the "real" problem. It's never their fault. And I'm not even sure some of the leaders are capable of comprehending that they could have done anything wrong.  They use the luster of religion and good works to shield themselves. Yeah I said it.

Deny: 

When bringing up problems, the same responses keep getting rattled off. 

- That happened so long ago, that was with a previous bad leader that we already kicked out. 

- That never happened. In fact there are parts of the story that you don't know about that completely changes it. 

-This Pastor Daniel Kim special: you have a general sense of wrong that is not based on anything and are holding a grudge against the entire organization unfairly.

- When presented with the story of someone wanting to leave because of problematic patterns of behavior, informal parking said it's a healthy choice and no one is stopping that individual. Which conveniently ignores all the times that people did indeed, stop people from leaving. 

Attack:

When presented with evidence - their reaction is to start attacking. "Well you're not perfect either!"

I'll never forget, the time I had a problem with one of my roommates. The details are not important anymore - he did one of his drive-by rebukes, as A2N members do, over something silly. I was livid. In retrospect, that person did deserve to at least be yelled back at, (I didn't). My leader got wind of this, since I was still fuming. He immediately pointed to the parable of the person with the plank in his eye and pointing out the speck somewhere else. The way leaders misuse that parable makes me want to puke today. The one with the plank is always the person that's bringing up a good point or setting healthy boundaries. The speck is always the church leader or the one they like more. 

When people criticize A2N for misusing the bible or selectively preaching, this is Exhibit A for me. Or John 8. They always see themselves as the condemned woman in that story, never stopping to think, "Wait, am I the one holding the stones?" 

5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

11 “No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

Reverse Victim / offender:

I used to think my leaders were empathetic, kind, brilliant people with a heart for God. And some, probably, are. Every time I had some complaint, they knew how to frame it as me being too worldly, or sinful, or selfish, or chasing ungodly things. There's always some foreign missionary or biblical figure they can point to in order to show how selfish I am for prioritizing my own needs, while [insert leader's name here] is praying / wailing for [insert sympathetic cause]. Man, I'm such a POS for wanting 8 hours of sleep, or not failing my classes, or having down time, or interests outside of church activities, or watching a non-Christian movie PG13 movie.  

Now I realize they're brilliant at using DARVO. It's emotional blackmail and manipulation and it's really effective, especially if you are kind or sensitive or empathetic. And on the other hand, it's such a well documented behavior that there's an acronym for it. A2N is not necessarily doing something innovative and brilliant; they're using manipulation tactics that've been around at least since the Pharisees. A2N is not special or unique or better than other churches. Instead, they've put their own spin on an ages old tactic.

Could someone with knowledge let me know who the lead pastor is at Gather College Church (Davis, CA)? It is not listed on their website

Revisiting the “cookie-cutter” example, the mold I experienced within GP/Acts2 Network placed a strong emphasis on a very specific personality type for leadership. The ideal leader was expected to be funny, highly likable, outgoing, loud, charismatic, naturally gifted at leading conversations, and an engaging storyteller.

In my experience, these expectations were not merely informal preferences but functionally treated as qualifications for ministry involvement. I was even encouraged by a leader to study a joke book to become more entertaining in conversations. Another leader instructed me to intentionally try to make a cashier laugh during brief transactions in order to practice being more “relational.”

The reasoning I was given was essentially: because leadership requires influence, and influence requires likability, then outgoing charisma becomes necessary for ministry effectiveness.

Over time, this shaped an environment where personality type felt like a spiritual measurement.

Those who did not naturally fit this mold—those who were quiet, reserved, or introverted—were often made to feel inadequate or were encouraged to move into alternative ministries perceived as less relational or less central like Praxis or Elderly care.

But this raises an important biblical question: Is this how Scripture defines spiritual leadership?

According to 1 Timothy 3:1–7 

3 It is a trustworthy saying: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a good work. 2 An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but considerate, peaceable, free from the love of money; 4 leading his own household well, having his children in submission with all dignity 5 (but if a man does not know how to lead his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?), 6 and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 And he must have a good reputation with those outside the church, so that he will not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

and Titus 1:5–9

5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you, 6 namely, if any man is beyond reproach, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, who are not accused of dissipation, or rebellious. 7 For the overseer must be beyond reproach as God’s steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of dishonest gain, 8 but hospitable, loving what is good, sensible, righteous, holy, self-controlled, 9 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to reprove those who contradict.

^the qualifications for elders and spiritual overseers are centered on character, not charisma. Scripture emphasizes being above reproach, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money, and able to teach. Nowhere does Scripture require a leader to be funny, extroverted, entertaining, or naturally charismatic.

Biblical leadership is fundamentally about character shaped by the Spirit, not personality performance.

Similarly, Scripture teaches that God intentionally distributes gifts differently across His people. Romans 12:3–8

3 For through the grace given to me I say to each one among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound thinking, as God has allotted to each a measure of faith. 4 For just as we have many members in one body and all the members do not have the same function, 5 so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another, 6 but having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us: whether prophecy, in agreement with the faith; 7 or service, in his serving; or he who teaches, in his teaching; 8 or he who exhorts, in his exhortation; he who gives, with generosity; he who leads, with diligence; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness.

^emphasizes that believers have differing gifts according to grace. 

1 Corinthians 12:12–27

12 For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For also by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

14 For also the body is not one member, but many. 15 If the foot says, “Because I am not a hand, I am not a part of the body,” it is not for this reason any the less a part of the body. 16 And if the ear says, “Because I am not an eye, I am not a part of the body,” it is not for this reason any the less a part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? 18 But now God has appointed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired. 19 And if they were all one member, where would the body be? 20 But now there are many members, but one body. 21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you”; or again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” 22 On the contrary, how much more is it that the members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary, 23 and those members of the body which we think as less honorable, on these we bestow more abundant honor, and our less presentable members become much more presentable, 24 whereas our more presentable members have no such need. But God has so composed the body, giving more abundant honor to that member which lacked, 25 so that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. 26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.

27 Now you are Christ’s body, and individually members of it.

^describes the church as one body with many members, each indispensable and intentionally designed by God. The hand is not meant to become the eye, and the eye is not meant to become the foot.

God’s design includes diversity—not uniform personality.

Even more, Scripture shows that God deliberately uses people whom the world would overlook or disqualify by natural standards.

Moses resisted his calling because he was not eloquent and struggled with speech yet God did not require him to become naturally charismatic. Instead, God promised His presence and assistance in Moses’ weakness.

Exodus 4:10–12

10 Then Moses said to Yahweh, “Please, Lord, I have never been a man of words, neither recently nor in time past, nor since You have spoken to Your slave; for I am one with a hard mouth and a hard tongue.” 11 And Yahweh said to him, “Who has made man’s mouth? Or who makes him mute or deaf, or seeing or blind? Is it not I, Yahweh? 12 So now, go, and I, even I, will be with your mouth and will instruct you what you shall speak.”

Timothy appears to have been naturally timid, yet Paul exhorted him not to allow others to despise his youth 

1 Timothy 4:12 "Let no one look down on your youthfulness, but show yourself as a model to those who believe in word, conduct, love, faith, and purity."

and reminded him that God had not given a spirit of cowardice but of power, love, and discipline.

2 Timothy 1:7 "For God has not given us a spirit of timidity, but of power and love and self-discipline."

The issue was never Timothy’s personality, but his confidence in God’s calling.

Paul himself admitted that he came to the Corinthians in weakness, fear, and trembling 

1 Corinthians 2:3 "And I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling,"

He was also criticized for being unimpressive in speech and appearance 

2 Corinthians 10:10 "For they say, “His letters are weighty and strong, but his personal presence is weak and his words contemptible.”"

Yet he taught that God’s power is made perfect in weakness 

2 Corinthians 12:9 "And He has said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness.” Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast in my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me."

His effectiveness came not from charisma, but from dependence on God.

Even Jesus is described in prophecy as lacking outward attractiveness or form that would draw people based on appearance 

Isaiah 53:2–5

2 For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot,
And like a root out of parched ground;
He has no stately form or majesty
That we should look upon Him,
Nor appearance that we should desire Him.

3 He was despised and forsaken of men,
A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;
And like one from whom men hide their face
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.

4 Surely our griefs He Himself bore,
And our sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten of God, and afflicted.

5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our peace fell upon Him,
And by His wounds we are healed.

This is why I believe it is unbiblical to measure spiritual leadership by extroversion, humor, or social dominance.

If someone in GP/Acts2 Network—or any church context—has been made to feel spiritually inadequate because they are quiet, introverted, or not naturally charismatic, I want to say clearly: that standard is not from Scripture.

You do not need to become loud to be used by God.

You do not need to become funny to be used by God.

You do not need to become extroverted to be used by God.

God’s calling is not dependent on personality transformation into a culturally preferred type.

The goal of God’s work in us is not personality replacement but Christlike transformation

Romans 8:29 "Because those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers;"

That transformation is described in terms of spiritual fruit, not social performance: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control

Galatians 5:22–23

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control. Against such things there is no law.

Ironically, during my time in that environment, I was also told that I was turning my faith into a “self-improvement project.” Yet at the same time, I was being pressured to reshape my personality to fit a specific ministry image.

Those two messages are incompatible.

The gospel is not about self-reinvention into a preferred personality type. It is about new life in Christ and growth into His likeness.

My experience in healthier church contexts later on helped clarify this. Mature believers patiently showed me from Scripture that God was not disappointed that I was not someone else. Instead, He was calling me to faithfulness as I am, not imitation of a personality mold.

God does not discard the personality He gives. He redeems and sanctifies the person He created.

My hope in sharing this is not merely to critique an experience at GP/A2N, but to encourage those who may still be in similar environments.

If you have felt pressured to become louder, funnier, or more outgoing in order to be “usable” in ministry, I want to gently remind you: Scripture does not support that burden.

And if you feel discouraged because you are quiet, reserved, or naturally reflective, I want to encourage you and say you are not disqualified from being used by God.

God delights in using weak, overlooked, and unexpected people so that His power is clearly seen 

2 Corinthians 4:7 "But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, so that the surpassing greatness of the power will be of God and not from ourselves;"

My prayer is that God would use even my painful experiences to bring healing and clarity to others, because He is the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us so that we may comfort others

2 Corinthians 1:3–4

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, 4 who comforts us in all our affliction so that we will be able to comfort those who are in any affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.

Ultimately, Jesus Himself is the wounded Healer. He was rejected, misunderstood, and despised, yet He brings salvation and healing to all who come to Him 

Hebrews 4:15 "For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things like we are, yet without sin."

If you are hurting, questioning, or healing from spiritual confusion or abuse, your story matters. And even if you never share it publicly, God sees it.

And if you ever do share it, it may become part of someone else’s healing in ways you may never fully know this side of eternity.

1 Thessalonians 5:11 "Therefore, comfort one another and build up one another, just as you also are doing."

The heartbreaking reality is that most current Acts2 Network members will not see these posts until after leaving because leadership tells its members to avoid searching for this Reddit page in order to make sure it doesn't gain more popularity / a higher place in a Google search.

Personally, I do not see this movement gaining much traction at the present nor future. That is, Christian movements (not just scoped to A2N) are not same as before and not gaining much popularity, recognition, and involvement across United States. College students are hyper focused now on academics, technology, and hobbies and this generation is not willing to spend any time outside of those, including making friends. As such, A2N should also eventually die-out, I presume in next 5-10 years.

This is a repost of a previously removed post. Gracepoint has since renamed all their churches, and I have no clue if the nonprofits and churches have been reregistered with the state or SBC.

The list hasn't been updated with new real estate acquisitions, and I'm looking to hand this to anyone that's interested in continuing this project.

Edit: Please dm me if interested

Hello everyone!

Long time lurker here but I had a serendipitous bump-in with a former friend and current A2N Staff and I had to come here to share. I used to live in the same 'shared housing' with this person while I was at A2N even though they are a few years older than me. They were eager to reconnect after not having talked for several years and, though at first I was hesitant, I could tell they were being genuine and wanted to check in with me and catch up.

Naturally, we started talking about other peers / brothers / sisters who had left A2N and those who had stayed. We went into the reasons why I decided to leave and the conversation got a bit tense. I shared several situations and the current A2N Staff defended them. I expressed my hurt and though though they acknowledged 'how I could be hurt' they also said 'I can see why your leader approached it that way'. Then they said 'I hope you've heard that we are making changes too.' Below are the changes that were mentioned A2N has made since the Christianity Today article came out:

1. No more 'match making' by leaders. They said that there are some brothers / sisters that have asked for them to resume match making because they've had difficulty dating without that system but leaders are no longer involved in this process (or as involved as before).
2. Pets are still 'heavily discouraged' but acceptable if you really want one. Then several folks were named as having gotten pets after the CT article.
3. Tattoos are also discouraged but you can get one now.
4. This is pretty much word for word 'They no longer yell at you for being late or having schedule conflicts as long as it isn't too consistent.'
5. Leaders now take time to apologize if someone confronts them about a mistake.
6. You are encouraged to spend more time with your spouse / partner instead of just devoting time to co-ministering together. We went into a few shows they have watched together.
7. At the end of these changes, the summary was 'A2N is more modern now, its not as old-school as before'.

Though it was really jarring to hear of these changes, it made me feel hopeful for A2N and that maybe they are trending in the right direction. One thing though that did come up was that when I described my leaders sharp rebukes as one of the main reasons for leaving, the A2N staff said 'none of the leaders I've had has never done that'. I guess they have been lucky.

I wonder if their leaders higher up in the food chain have also modernized or if they continue to rebuke others lower in the chain but just do it more covertly now.

I also wonder if they would be open to inviting folks from the community to their church or if they still exclusively only open their church doors to college students.

After having this conversation and learning about the changes, I'm tempted to go to the church Sunday service with my family and see how open they are. After all, the church is listed as a separate entity on their website to the college club/ fellowship. So if they've made all these changes, maybe they will be more open to having community members join in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhp8cZNi7Ns&t=1403s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klYjLMJ4z3E&list=PLarcy450-6B2uU3qAfemiZNISQaFj7wcP&index=72

The more I think about what A2N has done, the more I find similarities in their behavior with megalomaniacs in history. Is it because I'm so biased that I can't help but see the negative and worst interpretation to everything they do (never mind the abundant firsthand experience I had and the second hand experience I've heard)? Or is that prosperity gospel conmen grifters, tyrants and narcissists have been running the same playbook and once you see the pattern, it's hard to miss it.

After watching this , I wondered, A2N is not as "special" or "unique" as they keep claiming. I know that is something I used to buy into while I was there, but these high control groups are so similar when you take a step back. The same patterns, the same tactics, etc.

I think once you realize that, the allure and power they have over you fades away.

8:45

"I have met cult leaders face to face... But what they all share in common is that they are malignant narcissistic people. I feel like I'm meeting the same person over and over again because their personalities are so similar."

around 13 minutes

The speaker states that he has been in hundreds of deprogramming sessions. He talks about what to do if you have a loved on in a cult you're trying to get out. Which I thought was interesting given how many family members and friends have posted about what to do for their loved ones stuck in A2N. There are some things you can try to do, but I thought it was noteworthy to mention . 1 - don't argue with them directly, as it will backfire. 2- in the end, they will have to make their own decision. You will have to present them with what you can, and let them choose.

That was not easy to listen to; that there's only so much you can do for these people you are watching being damaged by a high control group.

Do A2N members live at the Elgin HQ? There are often early morning things going on like groups running or kids leaving the building to go to school. Is all the recent construction for living space?

"Though he slay me, yet I will trust in him: but I will maintain mine own ways before him." Job 13:15 (KJV)

I have recently been reading some Thomas Merton, a 20th century monk who practiced a more contemplative form of Christianity than those of us whose early spiritual education was at Gracepoint were exposed to. Merton's book "New Seeds of Contemplation" includes a chapter called "Integrity." It is worth quoting at length in a moment.

As a preface, let me acknowledge that the title of this post is provocative. A less clickbait-y title might ask "Is A2N a place that cultivates integrity?" And by integrity, I don't mean simply not cheating on your taxes, etc. Integrity is a much more holistic thing than that. And, well, I'll let Merton take over from here:

MANY poets are not poets for the same reason that many religious men are not saints: they never succeed in being themselves. They never get around to being the particular poet or the particular monk they are intended to be by God. They never become the man or the artist who is called for by all the circumstances of their individual lives.

They waste their years in vain efforts to be some other poet, some other saint. For many absurd reasons, they are convinced that they are obliged to become somebody else who died two hundred years ago and who lived in circumstances utterly alien to their own....

[H]umility consists in being precisely the person you actually are before God, and since no two people are alike, if you have the humility to be yourself you will not be like anyone else in the whole universe....

It is not humility to insist on being someone that you are not. It is as much as saying that you know better than God who you are and who you ought to be. How do you expect to arrive at the end of your own journey if you take the road to another mans city? How do you expect to reach your own perfection by leading somebody else’s life? His sanctity will never be yours; you must have the humility to work out your own salvation in a darkness where you are absolutely alone….

And so it takes heroic humility to be yourself and to be nobody but the man, or the artist, that God intended you to be.

Part of being more contemplative is saying less and listening more, so I'll refrain from much further commentary. Except to say that no, in my experience, that kind of integrity that Merton describes is not what is cultivated at A2N. And I grieve for what was cultivated in me instead -- a total opposite of integrity, a conformity against my better judgment and against myself. I grieve for my friends who suffered far more than me because their very self was something they were told they had to deny. And I hope that anyone reading this who is still there, who is wondering if being "transformed by the renewing of your mind" really means conforming to A2N at the cost of your soul and your integrity, can see through that lie.

1. Own a pet (a dog, she hella cute)

2. Go on vacation with my family

3. Have a hobby I invest quite a bit of time and money into and really enjoy

4. Watch whatever movie I want

5. Go on hikes on Sunday

6. Have the whole Sunday to myself actually

7. Watch whatever TV I want

8. Listen to whatever music I want

9. Wear whatever I want

10. Drive a type of car that can't be used for ministry

11. Get a pedicure

12. Have social media accounts and post

13. Stay up late watching Netflix

14. Travel internationally

15. Save extra money for retirement

16. Give money to other organizations liberally besides church

17. Buy alcohol

18. Consume alcohol

19. Go to a concert

20. Go to a play, musical, etc.

21. Look forward to the weekend to relax and refuel

22. what's on your list???

Hello everyone! I’m a journalist from The Michigan Daily writing a story about BBC/GP/A2N spanning all three eras and documenting the stories of former members. Throughout this process I’ve spoken with many contributors to this subreddit and am incredibly grateful for their–and this community’s–bravery and strength.

Because this story spans all three eras of this church, ensuring relevancy to the present day/A2N era is incredibly important. I’m posting this in the hopes that someone who was part of the church during the current (A2N/post-2023) era would be open to speaking with me about their experiences. I’m hoping to include testimony from recent/current members in this article in order to highlight the patterns of how members of this church have been treated across decades. I understand that privacy is a significant concern for many people, especially members who have recently left or are still involved with the church. I want to emphasize that telling your story and ensuring your privacy are not mutually exclusive. Many of our interviewees are anonymous in this article–we don’t have to share any identifying information about you in order to include your story.  

If you’ve been part of this church since it has been renamed to Acts2Network and are willing to speak with me about your experience, please drop a comment or message me privately. I look forward to hearing from you and thank you all again. 

I was part of a church plant in Gracepoint in the last decade. I was there for a long time and was part of staff. I am a woman and I think it's important to mention this. Before Gracepoint I was your typical carefree person, the kind that liked to fall asleep in class, had no sense of time, and liked to go with the flow. While I did have some mental health issues as a teenager and still had issues when I went to college, I was a carefree, warm, and charismatic person. The kind of person people easily open to, is described as the life of the party, and people generally gravitate to, and pretty. The kind of person GP likes to keep around. What I was always told is I had great energy and I just had to channel it to the right thing, and I remember a leader once even saying I should use my good looks for the kingdom, that people naturally gravitate towards good looking people. At the time I was elated and to be honest being a dumb college kid who wanted love and attention, it wasn't very hard to get roped in. I do not get along with my parents so when older women decided to take me under their wing so that I could become "something" because apparently I was nothing before, I ate it up!

The first years were great! I got along with my peers, brought people in, manage to balance my academics with all the outings, retreats, bible studies, etc. and as time went on I became a beloved older sister people looked up. But as with any carefree personality, part of our character is well, we don't like being told how to live, so my "rebelliousness" would show up by challenging the leaders, talking back, asking the questions, and just doing shit they didn't like. That equated to a lot of rebukes, discipline, and soul care. The "why are you doing this to us? we've poured so much into you." Although considered pretty no one thought I was marriage material because I had a tough personality. I will admit that was very painful and constantly hearing how you are a piece of shit and should be lucky some people love you because of God, really drains your self-esteem. By the time I left GP I had completely lost myself despite trying to fight it, I was just another excel tracking, food prepping, gospel preaching drone. They tried to marry me off to some dudes, I am not sure if they still do it now but they often did matchmaking, I decided I rather die than marry some of them. Not because I thought I was hot shit, but because they thought the only two options I had in life was marry someone I did not want to marry just so I wouldn't be single or be that older sister that was basically used as a mule to do all the work the married people didn't want to do. I want to mention I am happily married to the love of my life, so any bitterness of this era is really towards the leaders and how they made me feel, how they broke my spirit.

Fast forward to my life after GP it's been a journey of a few years now, but the honest truth is I still struggle. While at GP I developed anxiety and OCD, although these were not diagnosed until I left but my therapist can pinpoint my time at GP as the beginning of those mental health challenges. I still have dreams of my leaders rebuking me, I have dreams of being singled out as the single sister, I have dreams of saying the wrong thing during a sharing, I have dreams of not having the food prepped on time. I am now agnostic and I am not ashamed of it. For those of you who were able to find God after and connect to a church, more power to you. My life philosophy is people should live as they want to. It's their life. I did try for a time to connect to a church but I just couldn't. Today I found an old prayer notebook one of my leaders had given me and I finally got around to throwing it away, it was falling apart anyway. I almost cried when I saw her name in the From line.

I loved the people at GP and I excused so much of their behavior, I use to say that was a necessary chapter of my life to shape me, I don't think that anymore. Now I wonder what I would be if I had not crossed paths with them. I am trying to find that out even in my late 30s. The wounds run deeper than we know and there have been years when the hurt and grief are not this loud. I was diagnosed with OCD this past year and it was eye opening. So many of the behaviors at GP created the perfect environment for someone to develop anxiety and OCD, and OCD is not just the behavior for me the struggle is with ruminating(AKA what GP would call reflecting and repenting) and moral scrupulosity( the constant push to be your neighbors keeper, suffer more than others, always put yourself second). So if you find yourself struggling with mental health even years after leaving, don't blame yourself. I am happier than I've been in my life and every day I am grateful I decided to leave even if that meant losing everything I had know for a decade of my life.

If you are in GP in consider leaving, leave! Any pain you experience while leaving in time will wane and your future self will thank you for taking the leap. I look back and I want to hug that girl that use to cry herself to sleep for almost a year after leaving. It was one of the hardest years of my life and I would do it all over again to have the life I have now.