A Brief Response to Tim Challies

Hello Tim.

At some point I hope to provide a more thorough response to what you have written. In the meantime, I hope you will read all of my documents and also my posts at BrentDetwiler.com. That's required reading if you are going to post about me.

What you fail to realize is the pervasive and profound nature of problems in SGM. Hundreds, if not thousands of people have been mishandled and mistreated. You don't have two anti SGM blogs, Sovereign Grace Survivors and SGM Refuge, because of disagreements between C.J. and me. You really must get educated about the depth and breadth of ungodly practices that have existed in the movement. You haven't done your homework.

You also fail to recognize the long term and serious nature of C.J.'s sins. Many men have brought many charges for many years against C.J. In each case, with little or no success. I love C.J. I love SGM. I count it a privilege to have been one of four founders. I served on the Board of Directors for 25 years. Few men know C.J. as well as I do. Dave Harvey is interim President of SGM. Here is his description of C.J. which is the experience of many others.

“To correct CJ, or to challenge his own self-perception, was to experience a reaction through e-mails, consistent disagreement (without seeking to sufficiently understand), a lack of sufficient follow-up and occasionally, relational withdrawal. Along with this, CJ was poor in volunteering areas of sin, temptation or weakness in himself.” --Dave Harvey

In spite of this, no one has been shown more mercy or patience in our movement. He has been treated with kindness and shown great respect.

That's why this is not a Brent and C.J. thing. It is much bigger. This is not about slander, it is about truth. There is a time to address corporate sin. That's why we have an entire section of the Bible called The Prophets. There is also a time to "tell it to the church" when sin is not repented of, confession is not forthcoming, and restitution of wrong not pursued. I sent my documents to the SGM pastors on July 6 after several deceitful and misleading statements and actions by C.J. and SGM. I didn't want to and tried not to. Once again, you are uninformed and therefore misguided in your comments.

Lastly for now, you failed to state that which is repeatedly stated in my documents. Time and time and time again, I expressed my willingness to meet with C.J. and pursue mediation if necessary, if only he would give me open, honest and accountable answers in print and in advance of our meeting. I wanted to know his thoughts, prepare for our time, and formulate an agenda. All that would greatly assist our conversation and interaction. I never intended to publish his response (something slanderously asserted by SGM and contrary to the evidence). But C.J. refused to respond in a thorough going manner even though he promised me he would do so. It is for good reason, C.J. and the Board cannot be trusted.

You appear oblivious to the fact that there has been lying, spin and cover up by them. You recognize faith by works, roots by fruits, and the heart by the mouth. These are not grotesque judgments. What I say is clearly born out. A just verdict is pleasing to God. Acquitting evil is not. That is why I hope C.J. will one day give transparent answers to the questions I asked, the points I raised, and the illustrations I shared. I want him to have his day in court. But for now, he is in contempt. I have repeatedly asked C.J. and the Board to correct any inaccuracy (which is clear in the documents and not mentioned by you) and defend freely against any charge. What I have written is not tabloid journalism. They have provided me no input except that which I include in the documents.

Tim, there are serious issues of deceit, hypocrisy, arrogance, authoritarianism in C.J.'s life and the ministry of SGM. Now, thanks to your post, your audience is oblige to read my 600 pages of documentation (I mean slander) and access my blog in order to know the truth because they have not gotten it from you.

Brent Detwiler

Update on Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 3:47PM by Brent Detwiler

MY ANSWER TO TIM'S CHALLIES REPONSE 

This is the only comment I received from Mr. Challies.  "What you have not done is make a convincing biblical case that your actions are sanctioned by Scripture." 

Well, what you have done is ignore everything I wrote. But to your lonely comment above.

You should start with Isaiah and don't stop until you get to the end of the gospels. At least for starters. Are you suggesting there is no place to warn others of harm or correct corporate sin or adjust an individual who influences all the leaders/churches in the movement? This is a constant theme or refrain in Scripture.

The first two steps of Matthew 18:15-17 have been followed countless times with C.J. There should have been a public appeal for repentance a long time ago. Some form of discipline should have been implemented. We were cowards.

Everyone who is part of the inner circle realizes we've been soft on C.J. and did not follow 1 Tim 5:19-21. We treated him with favoritism and partiality. And most egregiously, a long list of men have been removed from ministry by C.J. for far lesser sins. Men like Joshua Harris have recently and publicly confessed they did not hold C.J. accountable due to fear. He and others did not want to anger C.J. or fall out of his favor.  For good reason, this has often happened in our history.

Tim, C.J. s not above reproach (1 Tim 3:1-7; Tit 1:5-9). He should not be President of SGM.

Tragically, we have disobeyed these four passages of holy Scripture (and others) and many people have suffered as a result. That's why the Covenant Life Church pastors are demanding change on behalf of C.J. and SGM. That is one of the reasons Joshua Harris recently resigned from the SGM Board..

You should read all of my documents.  For example, Parts 5: In Need of a Corporate Rebuke, 6: Tell It to the Church, and Part 7: Is C.J. Above Reproach. They are available on my blog under "File" and "The Documents."

By the way, people have asked if you ever talked to me or wrote me before you rebuked me this morning. Of course, the answer is no. If you had I could have helped you from erring.  So do you have a "convincing biblical case" in support of your action?

This is my last comment on your blog. If you'd like to interact further please comment on BrentDetwiler.com.

Thanks

Brent Detwiler