So many families have been destroyed. Lives ruined and even member suicides as the result of the Philadelphia Church of God (PCG) evil “No Contact Ruling” / Shunning.
THE PCG IS TRULY AN EVIL “CHURCH”
"Beware if You Are Considering Joining or Rejoining the PCG!"
In the New Testament / early Christian gatherings, being “put out” (excluded from fellowship) was rare, serious, and restorative in intent, not authoritarian. Here’s how it worked, step by step, according to Scripture.
I will also show a Scripture-based checklist of warning signs of unbiblical authority. These are not personality quirks or preferences — they are structural and behavioral red flags that show when leadership has moved from shepherding to control.
1. What would cause a believer to be put out of the “church” ?
Only serious, unrepentant sin that harmed the body and dishonored God.
A. Persistent, unrepentant sin
Not a stumble — but refusal to repent after correction.
Matthew 18:15–17
- Private correction
- Then with witnesses
- Then brought before the gathering
- Only if the person refuses to listen at every step → treated as “outside”
This shows removal was the last resort, not the first response.
B. Open, scandalous behavior
Sin so public and destructive that it corrupted the whole body.
1 Corinthians 5:1–13
- Sexual immorality openly practiced
- No repentance
- Paul says keeping such a person inside harms everyone
“A little leaven leavens the whole lump.”
C. False teaching that would not stop
Especially teachings that divided or led people away from Christ.
Titus 3:10
“After warning a divisive person once and then twice, have nothing more to do with them.”
D. Ongoing disorder and refusal to change
Not doctrinal error, but behavior that disrupted the gathering.
2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14–15
- Idleness
- Disregard for apostolic instruction
- Still treated as a brother, but fellowship restricted
2. Who made the decision to put someone out?
👉 The entire gathering, not one man.
This is critical.
Matthew 18:17
“Tell it to the assembly (ekklesia).”
1 Corinthians 5:4–5
“When you are assembled, and I am present in spirit…”
Paul did not excommunicate the man himself.
He instructed the local body to act together.
There is no biblical example of:
- A single pastor
- A headquarters
- A top-down hierarchy
- A prophet or apostle acting alone
making unilateral “no-contact” decrees.
3. Who actually carried it out?
Again: the congregation as a whole.
What “putting out” meant:
- Removal from shared meals / communion
- Loss of teaching and fellowship
- Social separation within the body
But not hatred, not shunning for punishment, and not family destruction.
2 Thessalonians 3:15
“Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.”
4. What was the goal of putting someone out?
Always restoration — never control.
1 Corinthians 5:5
“So that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.”
And when repentance happened?
2 Corinthians 2:6–8
“The punishment inflicted by the majority is sufficient… now forgive and comfort him.”
The person was welcomed back, not permanently labeled.
5. What did NOT exist in the early church
Scripture gives no support for:
- Permanent shunning
- Family members being cut off
- One leader enforcing silence
- Fear-based obedience
- Organizational loyalty overriding conscience
Those practices resemble later religious systems, not apostolic Christianity.
In summary
Question | Biblical Answer |
What caused removal? | Serious, unrepentant sin or destructive teaching |
Who decided? | The entire local gathering |
Who enforced it? | The assembly together, not a ruler |
Purpose? | Repentance and restoration |
Duration? | Only until repentance |
Attitude? | Love, grief, and hope — not punishmen ——————————— |
Below is a clear, side-by-side contrast showing how modern hierarchical church discipline departed from the New Testament model, followed by a map of where and how the shift happened. I’ll stay grounded in Scripture rather than opinion.
1. Authority Structure: Scripture vs. Modern Hierarchy
New Testament
- Authority was local, plural, and relational
- Elders were shepherds among, not rulers over
- Christ alone was Head
Key texts
- Matthew 23:8–10 — “You are all brothers… one is your Teacher”
- Acts 14:23 — Elders appointed in every congregation
- 1 Peter 5:1–3 — “Not lording it over those entrusted to you”
👉 No headquarters. No chain of command. No supreme leader.
Modern Hierarchical System
- Authority is centralized
- Decisions flow top-down
- Loyalty to organization often outweighs conscience
Common features:
- Headquarters
- Senior pastor / apostle / prophet
- Binding decrees affecting people the leader has never met
📌 Departure point:
Authority moved from Christ + local body → institution + office
2. Discipline Process: Then vs. Now
Biblical Process
Matthew 18:15–17
- Private correction
- Small group confirmation
- Whole assembly involvement
- Separation only if unrepentant
1 Corinthians 5
- Public sin
- Clear refusal to repent
- Action taken when the church is gathered
- Majority decision
- Restoration afterward
👉 Discipline was:
- Slow
- Transparent
- Reluctant
- Grief-filled
Modern Practice
Often:
- Immediate
- Secretive
- Leader-decided
- Enforced without appeal
Common realities:
- No witnesses
- No congregational vote
- No clear charges
- No path to restoration
📌 Departure point:
Discipline shifted from communal discernment → administrative enforcement
3. Who Decides?
Scripture
- The whole assembly
- Elders guide, but do not dictate
2 Corinthians 2:6
“Punishment by the majority is sufficient.”
The majority means:
- People knew the situation
- People agreed
- People also forgave
Modern Hierarchy
- A single leader or small executive group decides
- Members are informed after the fact
- Questioning is treated as rebellion
📌 Departure point:
Decision-making moved from body participation → elite control
4. Scope of Separation
New Testament
Separation meant:
- No shared communion
- No participation in teaching
- Loss of fellowship within the church
But:
- Family relationships remained intact
- Social cruelty forbidden
2 Thessalonians 3:15
“Do not regard him as an enemy.”
Modern Shunning
Often includes:
- Cutting off family
- Forbidding conversation
- Social erasure
- Fear-based compliance
📌 Departure point:
Correction morphed into social punishment
5. Duration and Goal
Biblical
- Temporary
- Purpose: repentance and restoration
2 Corinthians 2:7–8
“Forgive and comfort him… reaffirm your love.”
Failure to restore was itself considered sinful.
Modern
- Indefinite or permanent
- Restoration controlled by leadership
- Status never fully restored
📌 Departure point:
Discipline changed from healing → deterrence and control
6. Underlying Theology Shift
Apostolic Christianity
- Christ rules directly by the Spirit
- Every believer accountable to God
- Leaders are servants
Institutional Christianity
- Authority mediated through office
- Obedience equals faithfulness
- Dissent equals sin
📌 Core shift:
From spiritual family → religious corporation
7. Historical Map of the Departure
1st century
- House churches
- Plural elders
- Congregational discernment
2nd–3rd centuries
- Single “bishop” begins to dominate
- Authority becomes positional
4th century (Constantine)
- Church merges with state structure
- Power replaces persuasion
Medieval period
- Clerical class vs laity
- Excommunication becomes political
Modern era
- Corporate governance models
- CEO-style pastors
- Legal risk management replaces shepherding
📌 The farther from house churches, the farther from Scripture
8. Bottom Line Contrast
Aspect | New Testament | Modern Hierarchy |
Authority | Christ + local body | Office + institution |
Discipline | Reluctant & restorative | Immediate & punitive |
Decision maker | Whole assembly | Leader or HQ |
Transparency | Open | Secretive |
Family impact | Preserved | Often destroyed |
Goal | Restoration | Control / compliance |
Final Observation
What Scripture describes is not weak leadership —
it is restrained leadership under Christ.
When churches abandoned:
- plurality
- locality
- transparency
- congregational authority
they gained efficiency, but lost faithfulness.
——————————
Below is a clear, Scripture-based checklist of warning signs of unbiblical authority. These are not personality quirks or preferences — they are structural and behavioral red flags that show when leadership has moved from shepherding to control.
1. Decisions Are Made Without the Congregation
Warning sign
- Major decisions (discipline, removals, policy changes) are announced, not discussed
- Members are informed after the decision
Why it’s unbiblical
- Discipline required congregational involvement
Scripture
- Matthew 18:17 — “Tell it to the assembly”
- 2 Corinthians 2:6 — “Punishment by the majority”
🚩 Red flag: “We’ve already decided” language
2. One Man’s Authority Is Treated as God’s Voice
Warning sign
- Questioning leadership is equated with questioning God
- “Touch not the anointed” used to silence concerns
Why it’s unbiblical
- Apostles themselves were questioned
- No leader was infallible
Scripture
- Acts 17:11 — Tested teaching against Scripture
- Galatians 2:11 — Paul publicly corrected Peter
🚩 Red flag: Leader cannot be corrected
3. Discipline Is Secretive or Vague
Warning sign
- No clear accusation
- “Confidential matters”
- No witnesses or documentation
Why it’s unbiblical
- Biblical discipline was specific and known
Scripture
- 1 Timothy 5:19–20 — Charges require witnesses
- 1 Corinthians 5 — Sin was plainly stated
🚩 Red flag: You’re told “details don’t matter”
4. Immediate Punishment Without Matthew 18 Process
Warning sign
- People are removed instantly
- No private confrontation
- No gradual escalation
Why it’s unbiblical
- Jesus mandated a step-by-step process
Scripture
- Matthew 18:15–17
🚩 Red flag: “For the good of the church” used to skip steps
5. No Clear Path to Restoration
Warning sign
- Discipline is indefinite
- Requirements keep changing
- Restoration depends on leadership favor
Why it’s unbiblical
- Restoration was expected once repentance occurred
Scripture
- 2 Corinthians 2:7–8
- Galatians 6:1
🚩 Red flag: People are never fully welcomed back
6. Family and Natural Relationships Are Controlled
Warning sign
- Members told to limit or cut off family
- Silence enforced beyond church fellowship
Why it’s unbiblical
- Scripture forbids treating disciplined believers as enemies
Scripture
- 2 Thessalonians 3:15
- 1 Timothy 5:8
🚩 Red flag: Shunning becomes a loyalty test
7. Fear Is Used as a Motivator
Warning sign
- Fear of being “put out”
- Fear of losing salvation, protection, or status
- Fear of asking questions
Why it’s unbiblical
- God’s leaders lead by example, not intimidation
Scripture
- Romans 8:15
- 1 Peter 5:3
🚩 Red flag: Obedience driven by anxiety, not love
8. Us-vs-Them Language Is Normalized
Warning sign
- “The faithful” vs “rebels”
- “Outside voices are dangerous”
- Information is tightly controlled
Why it’s unbiblical
- Truth withstands examination
Scripture
- John 18:20
- 2 Corinthians 4:2
🚩 Red flag: Isolation framed as holiness
9. Leadership Is Unaccountable
Warning sign
- No mechanism to challenge leaders
- Internal review only
- Same people judge themselves
Why it’s unbiblical
- Elders were accountable to the body
Scripture
- 1 Timothy 5:20
- Acts 15 — Open dispute resolution
🚩 Red flag: Appeals always go “up,” never outward
10. Organizational Loyalty Equals Faithfulness
Warning sign
- Leaving the group equals leaving God
- Other believers dismissed as deceived
Why it’s unbiblical
- The Church is the body of Christ, not an institution
Scripture
- 1 Corinthians 1:12–13
- Ephesians 1:22–23
🚩 Red flag: “We are the only true church”
Quick Self-Test
If a church:
- Centralizes power
- Punishes quietly
- Discourages questions
- Controls relationships
- Uses fear to enforce unity
…it is operating outside the New Testament pattern, regardless of how biblical its language sounds.
Final Principle
Biblical authority invites light.
Unbiblical authority demands silence.
————————————
Here is a flowchart comparing biblical vs abusive discipline.
Then showing what healthy biblical leadership looks like in practice
Below are two complementary pieces:
- A clear, step-by-step flowchart comparing Biblical discipline vs. abusive discipline
- A practical picture of what healthy biblical leadership looks like in real life
I’ll keep this concrete and Scripture-anchored.
1. FLOWCHART: BIBLICAL vs. ABUSIVE DISCIPLINE
A. Biblical Discipline Flow (New Testament Model)
Concern arises
│
▼
Private conversation (Matt 18:15)
— gentle, specific, loving
│
├─ Repentance? ── YES ──► Forgiveness & restoration
│
▼ NO
Two or three witnesses (Matt 18:16)
— facts confirmed, not rumors
│
├─ Repentance? ── YES ──► Forgiveness & restoration
│
▼ NO
Tell it to the assembly (Matt 18:17)
— congregation informed
— elders guide, body discerns
│
├─ Repentance? ── YES ──► Public forgiveness & reaffirmed love
│ (2 Cor 2:7–8)
▼ NO
Temporary separation from fellowship
— grief, prayer, hope
— not treated as enemy (2 Thess 3:15)
│
▼
Repentance occurs
│
▼
Full restoration
— no stigma
— love reaffirmed
— relationship healed
Key characteristics
- Slow
- Transparent
- Congregational
- Temporary
- Restoration-focused
B. Abusive / Unbiblical Discipline Flow
Concern arises (often vague or secondhand)
│
▼
Leadership meets privately
— member not present
— no witnesses required
│
▼
Decision made at top
— "prayerfully decided"
— no appeal
│
▼
Announcement or silent removal
— no details given
— questions discouraged
│
▼
Shunning enforced
— social isolation
— family pressure
— fear reinforced
│
▼
Indefinite punishment
— restoration unclear or impossible
— status never fully restored
Key characteristics
- Fast
- Secretive
- Leader-driven
- Punitive
- Control-oriented
SIDE-BY-SIDE SUMMARY
Aspect | Biblical Discipline | Abusive Discipline |
First step | Private conversation | Leadership meeting |
Evidence | Witnesses required | Rumors accepted |
Decision | Whole assembly | Small elite group |
Transparency | Open & specific | Vague & secret |
Duration | Temporary | Indefinite |
Goal | Restoration | Deterrence / control |
Tone | Grief & love | Fear & shame |
2. WHAT HEALTHY BIBLICAL LEADERSHIP LOOKS LIKE IN PRACTICE
This is what actually happens when leadership is functioning according to Scripture.
1. Leaders See Themselves as Shepherds, Not Judges
In practice
- Leaders pursue people personally
- They initiate hard conversations privately
- They listen more than they speak
Scripture
- 1 Peter 5:2–3 — “Shepherd the flock… not lording it over”
- Ezekiel 34:4 — Condemns leaders who rule harshly
🟢 Healthy sign: Members feel safe bringing struggles forward
2. Authority Is Shared and Visible
In practice
- Multiple elders
- Decisions discussed openly
- No single “final word” personality
Scripture
- Acts 14:23 — Elders (plural)
- Proverbs 11:14 — Safety in many counselors
🟢 Healthy sign: Leaders sometimes disagree — and that’s okay
3. Correction Is Relational, Not Institutional
In practice
- Correction happens over meals, conversations, prayer
- No paperwork, threats, or policy manuals
- The goal is understanding, not compliance
Scripture
- Galatians 6:1 — Restore gently
- James 5:19–20 — Turning someone back saves them
🟢 Healthy sign: Correction feels personal, not procedural
4. The Congregation Is Trusted With Truth
In practice
- Members know what’s happening
- Facts are not hidden “for unity”
- Leaders trust the Spirit in the body
Scripture
- 1 Corinthians 12:7 — The Spirit given to each one
- John 18:20 — “I said nothing in secret”
🟢 Healthy sign: Unity is based on truth, not silence
5. Restoration Is Celebrated, Not Resented
In practice
- Repentance leads to joy
- No probation period
- No permanent labels
Scripture
- Luke 15 — The prodigal welcomed publicly
- 2 Corinthians 2:8 — Reaffirm love
🟢 Healthy sign: The church gets happy when people return
6. Leaders Are Correctable
In practice
- Leaders invite feedback
- Apologies are public when needed
- Authority never shields sin
Scripture
- Galatians 2:11
- 1 Timothy 5:20
🟢 Healthy sign: Leaders repent visibly
7. People Are Free to Leave Without Being Condemned
In practice
- Leaving is sad, not sinful
- Relationships remain
- No spiritual threats attached
Scripture
- Romans 14:4
- 1 Corinthians 7:23
🟢 Healthy sign: Love continues even when paths diverge
FINAL MEASURE (Very Important)
Ask this single question:
Does this leadership produce mature, free, loving believers — or fearful, dependent, silent ones?
- The Holy Spirit produces freedom
- Control produces conformity
——————————
Flowchart in a printable one-page handout
Biblical Vs Abusive Discipline — One‑page Flowchart
BIBLICAL vs ABUSIVE DISCIPLINE
A One‑Page, Scripture‑Anchored Comparison
BIBLICAL DISCIPLINE (New Testament Pattern)
Concern arises
│
▼
PRIVATE CONVERSATION
(Matthew 18:15)
— gentle, specific, loving
│
├─ Repentance? ── YES ──► Forgive & restore
│
▼ NO
TWO OR THREE WITNESSES
(Matthew 18:16)
— facts confirmed, not rumors
│
├─ Repentance? ── YES ──► Forgive & restore
│
▼ NO
TELL IT TO THE ASSEMBLY
(Matthew 18:17)
— elders guide, body discerns
│
├─ Repentance? ── YES ──► Public forgiveness
│ Reaffirm love
│ (2 Corinthians 2:7–8)
▼ NO
TEMPORARY SEPARATION
— grief, prayer, hope
— not treated as an enemy
(2 Thessalonians 3:15)
│
▼
REPENTANCE OCCURS
│
▼
FULL RESTORATION
— no stigma
— joy and healing
Core Characteristics
- Slow and careful
- Transparent
- Congregational
- Temporary
- Restoration‑focused
ABUSIVE / UNBIBLICAL DISCIPLINE (Control Model)
Concern arises
(often vague or secondhand)
│
▼
LEADERSHIP MEETS PRIVATELY
— member absent
— no witnesses required
│
▼
DECISION MADE AT THE TOP
— "prayerfully decided"
— no appeal
│
▼
ANNOUNCEMENT OR SILENT REMOVAL
— no clear charges
— questions discouraged
│
▼
SHUNNING ENFORCED
— social isolation
— family pressure
— fear used as leverage
│
▼
INDEFINITE PUNISHMENT
— restoration unclear or impossible
— permanent stigma
Core Characteristics
- Fast and secretive
- Leader‑driven
- Punitive
- Fear‑based
- Control‑oriented
SIDE‑BY‑SIDE SUMMARY
Aspect | Biblical Discipline | Abusive Discipline |
First step | Private conversation | Closed leadership meeting |
Evidence | Witnesses required | Rumors accepted |
Decision | Whole assembly | Small elite group |
Transparency | Open and specific | Vague and secret |
Duration | Temporary | Indefinite |
Goal | Restoration | Control / deterrence |
Tone | Love and grief | Fear and shame |
FINAL TEST
Does this process aim to restore a brother — or protect an institution?
FIELD MICE
Some time back when I was still in the Philadelphia Church of God. I attended a family event at the church compound in Edmond Ok.I went into a mens room. While in there I noticed an older man cleaning I told him he was doing a great job because it was so clean We talked a bit. It seems he was a member of the headquarters congregation. He was glad to see so many non HQ members at the event. He told me that HQ staff and ministers called members from outside HQ, “field mice” and that it was the job of the “field mice” to “pay and pray”. He didn’t like that sentiment and thought the term derogatory. He told me that he was thankful for us because without us “field mice” he would not have a job. I think if you ask any member of the PCG outside of HQ they will tell you that they are thought of as “field mice” and they can see the difference in how they are treated by HQ staff and ministers------------------
I hope my children contact me.
My greatest hope is that my children will one day reach out to me again.
If my son Nathan Moffett in Edmond, Oklahoma, and my daughter Elise Moffett Salinas in San Antonio, Texas were not involved with the Philadelphia Church of God (PCG), I would likely never speak publicly about this group. I would still pray for those who have been hurt, but my focus would remain private.
What compels me to speak is not anger — it is love for my children and concern for families who have experienced similar separation. Policies that discourage or prevent normal family contact have caused deep pain, not only to me, but to many others. I believe families should not be divided, and that love, communication, and reconciliation should always be encouraged.
Because of this, I plan to continue raising awareness about the impact these practices have on families. My goal is not to attack individuals, but to bring attention to the human cost of separation and to encourage open discussion. I hope that by sharing my experience, others may better understand how deeply these situations affect parents, children, and loved ones.
No comments:
Post a Comment