Other Problems with Gothardism

(a) Makes dogmatic assertions on arbitrary matters (e.g., "God's order of worship"). He apparently believes that every Scriptural truth can be systematically tied-up with a neat ribbon, without any exceptions. He then selects a Scriptural illustration that makes it all look air-tight (e.g., see pp. 4-5 of Secrets to Self-Acceptance on adoptive parents and the death of a parent). To disagree with Gothard is, in effect, to disagree with God. This can create great division in the local church. In Gothardom, every issue can become a test of fellowship.19a

(b) Appeal is to submit to his system -- a system of legalistic rules -- often based on Old
Testament ceremonial law, not to submit personally to God; God is thus turned into an impersonal Deity instead of a loving Father. With all the "universal, non-optional principles of life" that Gothard's Basic Seminar Textbook contains, there are literally thousands more pages of IBLP materials, all filled with lists of  "principles" for living the Christian life. How could anyone who reads them avoid drawing the conclusion that the Christian life is one of extremely complicated rule-keeping? Several Bible teachers have observed that legalism inevitably leads to license, because it frustrates the very grace of God. We need to become holy. Instead of being cleansed by God's Spirit, legalism depends on one's own efforts; and since man is not up to the task, sin invariably boils over in the human soul. 19b (Source: "Bill Gothard's Evangelical Talmud, Part 3: Gothard and the Law," by Ron Henzel, The Midwest Christian Outreach Journal, July-August 1998.)

(c) Teaches a social gospel geared to save society rather than the Good News of the humility of Christ through His death, burial, resurrection, and ascension. At its best, Gothard's system can only produce reformed sinners, not regenerated saints (Jan-Feb 1997, Fundamentalist Digest -- comments on Gothard's "most important letter -- ever" to "Pastors and Christian Leaders").

(d) Ignores a major premise of dispensational theology; i.e., the distinction between the nation of Israel and the Church. By "rightly dividing the Word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15) on the basis of Pauline Dispensationalism, there is no possible way that God's Old Testament promises and penalties concerning Israel can be applied to the heavenly Church; i.e., to the Christian, whose life is "hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3). (Source: Miles J. Stanford, Gothardism: Charismatic & Covenant, 4/97, p. 2.)

(e) Has a misunderstanding of the doctrine of grace. The Advanced Seminar Textbook offers "operational definitions" that are misleading and wrong. The Grace of God, which is God's unmerited favor, is defined by Gothard as: "The desire and power to reproduce ourselves spiritually." In this redefining and recasting of grace, Gothard does not even come close. The source of grace is God, not ourselves. It is a gift from God (Eph. 2:8-9) -- the goodness of God manifested toward the ill-deserving. Furthermore, Gothard defines faith as "Visualizing what God intends to do." Faith is not visualization in any sense. Faith (Greek: pistis) is trust in God and His Word. Faith is clinging to God and His promises (Rom. 10:17). It is translated as trust in most of the Old Testament passages. It is a distortion to turn a strong Biblical concept into a watered-down human endeavor of visualization. (Source: "A Study in Evolving Fadism: The Dangerous Leanings of Bill Gothard's Teachings," The Quarterly Journal of Personal Freedom Outreach, April-June 1996.) [In a paper by Gothard titled Definition of Grace [IBLP:2000], Gothard attacks the Biblical definition of grace as "unmerited favor," calling it instead a "faulty definition." He says, "In the Old Testament, those who found grace possessed qualities that merited God's favor." This "meriting God's favor" contradicts the heart and soul of the Biblical teaching about grace. For Gothard, the primary purpose of grace is to assist Christians in keeping the Law, and a primary purpose for keeping the Law is to "earn" more grace! (Source: Veinot & Henzel, A Matter of Basic Principles, pp. 143; 147.)]

(f) Has a weak view of the seriousness of sin in God's eyes -- sin is at times referred to as "failure" (e.g., see Rebuilder's Guide, pp. 100, 194). In some instances, he seems to have also abdicated individual responsibility for sin (e.g., see Rebuilder's Guide, pp. 79, 87, 91).
(g) Views spiritual warfare for the believer to include mandatory binding and rebuking of Satan and his demons, and "praying a hedge of thorns" around one's estranged spouse (see Rebuilder's Guide, pp. 115, 119-121, 124). (Gothard also teaches the concept of "ancestral" demons.) Ed Silvoso, a charismatic "spiritual warfare expert" has also appeared with Gothard at his seminars.20 A 1992 booklet, Ten Reasons for Alumni to Be Encouraged, describes a typical demon deliverance ritual then being conducted at various IBLP meetings.21

Even spiritual warfare guru Neil Anderson (author of The Bondage Breaker) appeared with Gothard at a 6/94 Homeschooling Training Seminar in Knoxville, Tennessee. Almost without exception, demonizers are eradicationists. Via their experience-centered error, the old man is "crucified, dead and gone -- extinct." Hence, it is a simple matter to substitute a demon for the indwelling old Adamic man. Cast out the demon of a specific symptom, and the individual is "delivered." (Source: Miles J. Stanford, 4/97 report, Gothardism: Charismatic & Covenant.)
(h) Leaves followers with a false understanding of spirituality -- in two ways. One way is that some begin to think holiness is conformity to lists of rules and regulations; emphasis is placed on external rather than internal issues. People may perceive themselves to be more spiritual than others in the church based on adherence to dietary regulations, hairstyles, clothing regulations, types of music they listen to, or a host of other issues promoted by Gothard. Paul frequently wrote against the use of an external standard (Colossians 2:16-17, 20-23).  The other way concerns Gothard's mystical tendencies.22

(i) An overly rigid division and emphasis on the tripartite division of man into body/soul/spirit.

(j) Supports principles by the implications of the text rather than by the interpretation of the text, leading often to the implications becoming the main teaching (e.g., Job neglected his family, hence his problems). In other words, he comes to the truth via analogy instead of by doctrine; i.e., he creates an analogy, and on the basis of that, he builds a truth. This is dangerous because one doesn't know what the product of the Scripture is, compared to what the product of the analogy is, because it's all mixed-up together.23 (See also pp. 119-124 & 157 of the Rebuilder's Guide for Gothard's derivation of his "praying a hedge of thorns" doctrine.)

(k) Similar to (j) above, Gothard makes a goal out of a byproduct. Gothard is seemingly filled with this urge of trying to solve the problems of youth and taking care of "basic youth conflicts." He is making a goal out of a byproduct. One illustration of this is the great appeal he makes for the desire for success. He teaches that if somebody wants to be successful, you teach him how to be successful. But the desire for success doesn't need to be glorified, it needs to be crucified! The Bible tells us how to be OBEDIENT, and if I am obedient, the byproduct is success. (Source: The Projector, Frank Sells.)

(l) Heavy reliance on paraphrased editions of the Bible (Phillip's and Living Bible most frequently), allowing crucial principles to be established on the basis of the "feeling" expressed in the paraphrase. Gothard claims that every teaching from his seminars is "firmly rooted in the King James Bible," but that paraphrases, though not relied on for doctrine, "may be helpful in widening our understanding of a verse in its application" (personal letter on file).24 (How can either of these so-called versions be "helpful in widening our understanding of a verse in its application"? By relying on either of these Bibles for the application of doctrine is, by definition, relying on them for doctrine.)

(m) Guilty of mixing discovery with revelation. In one of his brochures, Gothard says that in his fifteen years of working with teenagers, he has "discovered" their problems. Then he takes the problems he has "discovered" and finds the answers in the Bible. The fallacy of this methodology  is that neither Gothard nor anybody else is qualified to discover the so-called problem any more than he is qualified to solve it. We need the statement of the problem from the Bible as well as the answer from the Bible. The Bible reveals both! Gothard in effect says, "Don't tell me anything about their problems. I know about the problems." The answer is, he doesn't! Both the problem and the answer need to be revealed from the Word, not discovered from experience. (Source: The Projector, Frank Sells.) (For example, where in the Bible is the teenager's need for acceptance and a good self-image? Gothard has obviously "discovered" this problem elsewhere.)

(n) Teaching on "Authority" and "Chain of Command" is unbiblical. Gothard teaches that children are to obey parents even when they know God's will is something different. He teaches that there should be an unquestioning accountability to the authority of parents, even after the child moves into adulthood, and even if the parents are unsaved (cf. Psa. 1).25 This includes the requirement that both sets of parents consent unanimously in their son's or daughter's selection of marriage partners, again, even if the parents are both pagans. Failure to obey this requirement, according to Gothard, will always lead to future marriage problems (see Rebuilder's Guide, pp. 78, 110, 154, 224, 235). (He also teaches that women are always to obey their husbands instead of God in matters of conscience.)

(o) Incomplete exegesis of Exodus 20:4-6 (and apparent ignorance of Ezek. 18) has led to the unscriptural teaching that children are guilty for the sins of their forefathers.26 This is the Charismatic error of applying Old Testament generational retribution to the church (Miles J. Stanford, Gothardism: Charismatic & Covenant, 4/97, p. 1). For example, Gothard teaches that the "sons" must agree to the guilt and ask God to remove its consequences, and that parents of an adopted child should research the child's biological parents and pray with the child for forgiveness, even casting out demons if necessary. He also warns against adopting a child altogether, because you might be adopting one that has been cursed (Exo. 20:4-6 again).27 (See Rebuilder's Guide, pp. 160 & 181; and "Ten Reasons Why Adopted Children Tend to Have More Conflicts," IBYC, 1982, pp. 1-2.) The only result of such a teaching is guilt -- something Gothard seems to desire to produce in his followers.