Saturday, May 31, 2014

Driscoll vs the Puritans on the subject of Song of Songs and marriage

Over his 18 some years in public ministry Mark Driscoll has come to be an advocate of the Puritans.  He has spoken fondly of them over the years and has been particularly keen to stress that the Puritans weren't against sex in marriage the way they are sometimes popularly portrayed as being.  There was even a time, which former members of Mars Hill Church may recall, where Mark Driscoll would mention that a Puritan group excommunicated a man for not having sex with his wife as much as the wife wanted sex. Driscoll never seemed particularly interested in sourcing any of this anecdote and so it often seemed to Wenatchee The Hatchet that, at best, the story would merely be apocryphal.  But perhaps historians of the Puritans can enlighten us all with respect to what real incident Mark Driscoll might have been referencing. 

Now there have been a few things said here and there about how Mark Driscoll has shared quite a bit about Grace Driscoll's personal history above and beyond what Mark Driscoll has shared about his own history and family history.  Andy and Wendy Alsup in particular, reviewed Real Marriage and Wendy Alsup noted that the book seemed lopsided in what was shared about Grace compared to what was shared about Mark Driscoll.  As public statements by Mark Driscoll about his wife go, he has actually publicly stated she has had five C-sections and a miscarriage in addition to having mentioned how bitter toward her and unsatisfied by her sexually in the earlier years of his marriage.  In the much-discussed "Can We ____?" chapter of Real Marriage a defense of oral sex and anal sex as acceptable among mutually consenting spouses was made.  And it is at this point, among others, that Mark Driscoll's public teaching and preaching seems to have little to do with what can be documented from the writings of Puritans.  The Puritans can seem to have more to do with being a useful name to drop for a group that Mark Driscoll has found useful rather than a group of authors whose work seems to have had any real perceptible influence on Driscoll's public ministry or writings.

Now it's true that some people don't even consider Richard Baxter to be a legit Puritan but let's start with Richard Baxter anyway, since he is popularly considered a Puritan and because excerpts of his practical writing on Christian economic (i.e. family) life was republished in a book format slightly before the publication of Real Marriage:
let's look at page 445 in a section where Baxter discusses the duties of wives to husbands and considers various grounds for legitimate possibility for divorce.

Quest. XI. Is not the case of sodomy or buggery a ground for warrantable divorce as well as
Answ. Yes, and seemeth to be included in the very word itself in the text, Matt. v, 31,32,

which signifieth uncleanness; or at least is fully implied in the reason of it. See Grotius
ibid, also of this.

Okay, so times have changed in the last few centuries and it would appear that Mark Driscoll has publicly endorsed as potentially acceptable within marriage acts that Richard Baxter advised were categorically sound reasons for a wife to divorce her husband, or at least so it would seem.

Then with respect to quite a few things Mark Driscoll has said in published books about his wife ... Baxter has some interesting directions toward spouses regarding their mutual obligation to preserve each other's honor.
page 437
Direct. IX. Also you must be careful of the lawful honour and good names of one another. You
must not divulge, but conceal, the dishonourable failings of each other; (as Abigail, except in any case compassion or justice require you to open them to any one for a cure, or to clear the truth). The reputation of each other must be as dear to you as your own. It is a sinful and unfaithful practice of many, both husbands and wives, who among their companions are opening the faults and infirmities of each other, which they are bound in tenderness to cover.  As if they perceived not that by dishonouring one another, they dishonour themselves. ...

from page 433
Remember still that you are both diseased persons, full of infirmities; and therefore expect the fruit of those infirmities in each other; and make not a strange matter of it, as if you had never known of it before. If you had married one that is lame, would you be angry with her for halting? ... Did you not know beforehand, that you married a person of such weakness, as would yield you some matter of daily trial and offense? If you could not bear this, you should not have married her.

Remember still that you are one flesh; and therefore be no more offended with the words or failings of each other, than you would be if they were your own. Fall out no more with your wife for her faults, than you do with yourself for your own faults; and than you would do, if hers had been your own. This will allow you such an anger and displeasure against a fault, as tendeth to heal it; but not such as tendeth but to fester and vex the diseased part. This will turn anger into compassion, and speedy, tender diligence for the cure.

For someone who has touted the Puritans as being fantastic it's a bit difficult to see how the ways in which Mark Driscoll wrote about his estimation of Grace Driscoll's failures would be much in keeping with Baxter's advice toward the married on preserving the honor of the other as though it were the public reputation of one's own self.

Now over the years Mark Driscoll has at times said that people who read Song of Songs as an allegory of the love of Christ for the Church ruin it because, well, then he proceeds to gay panic jokes with respect to the Parousia.  Well, this is another point about which Mark Driscoll seems to have little to do with the actual Puritans he sometimes likes to name-drop.

Let's see something the Puritan Richard Sibbes had to say about the Canticle of Canticles:
from the sermon "The Spouse, Her Earnest Desire After Christ"
... This book is nothing else but a plain demonstration and setting forth of the love of Christ to his church, and of the love of the church to Christ; so familiarly and plainly, that the Jews take great scandal at it, and would not have any read this book till they are come to the age of thirty years, lest they thereby should be tempted to incontinency; where in they would seem wiser than God himself. But the Holy Ghost is pleased thus by corporeal to act out those spiritual things, which are of a higher nature, that by thinking and tastign of the one they might be stirred up to translate their affectionss (which in youthful age are most strong) from the heat of natural love to spiritual things, to the things of God; and all those who are spiritually minded (for whom chiefly the Scriptures were written) will take special comfort and instruction thereby, though others take offence and scandal at it.  So here, the union between Christ and his spouse is so familiarly and livelily set forth by that uninon which is between the husband and wife, that, though ungodly men might take offense at it, yet the godly may be bettered by it.

Then there's some guy named Matthew Henry
Complete Commentary of the Whole Bible
Matthew Henry (1706)
... The books of scripture-history and prophecy are very much like one another, but this Song of Solomon's is very much unlike the songs of his father David; here is not the name of God in it; it is never quoted in the New Testament; we find not in it any expressions of natural religion or pious devotion, no, nor is it introduced by vision, or any of the marks of immediate revelation. It seems as hard as any part of scripture to be made a savour of life unto life, nay, and to those who come to the reading of it with carnal minds and corrupt affections, it is in danger of being made a savour of death unto death; it is a flower out of which they extract poison; and therefore the Jewish doctors advised their young people not to read it till they were thirty years old, lest by the abuse of that which is most pure and sacred (horrendum dictu—horrible to say!) the flames of lust should be kindled with fire from heaven, which is intended for the altar only. But, II. It must be confessed, on the other hand, that with the help of the many faithful guides we have for the understanding of this book it appears to be a
very bright and powerful ray of heavenly light, admirable fitted to excite pious and devout affections in holy souls, to draw out their desires towards God, to increase their delight in him, and improve their acquaintance and communion with him. It is an allegory, the letter of which kills those who rest in that and look no further, but the spirit of which gives life, 2 Cor. iii. 6; John vi. 63. It is a parable, which makes divine things more difficult to those who do not love them, but more plain and pleasant to those who do, Matt. xiii.

So if the Puritans considered the allegorical approach to Song of Songs to be the right and proper way to interpret the text and Mark Driscoll has repeatedly joked that he loves Jesus ... but "not like that" as a way to dispel even the possibility of a typological or allegorical reading of Song of Songs then he's coming across like a poser on just how much he really regards the Puritans as interpreters of biblical text when Song of Songs is the subject. 

In fact sometimes it can seem to Wenatchee The Hatchet (a matter of personal opinion) that Mark Driscoll's regard for the Puritans can end up seeming more formality than reality.  It is also a reason to doubt whether or not a sustained critique of Mark Driscoll as a Calvinist has any relevance to Mark Driscoll's ministry.  He wasn't always a Calvinist, for those who were at Mars Hill in the earlier years, and attempting to criticize his doctrine or ministry on the basis of appelations to Calvinism or Puritans also seems to run into the obstacle of how thoroughly he seems to ignore what the Puritans actually had to say about marriage and Song of Songs in order to have published large swaths of what actually ended up in Real Marriage.  You "could" get the Driscoll book but there wasn't anything in the book that added anything other than Driscollian autobiography to a number of ideas that were articulated by the likes of Richard Baxter centuries ago.

Warren Throckmorton publishes notes/outline for May 4, 2014 Driscoll sermon that corroborates broadcast delay process outlined by Mark Driscoll in 2009 sermon

It looks like Warren Throckmorton has published an outline of sermon duration and notes for a sermon preached May 4 that was scheduled for "Playback" May 18, 2014.  This was the sermon that was apparently edited down and had six minutes of material removed.

Throckmorton has published the notes for consultation here:

What this seems to confirm, so far, is what Wenatchee The Hatchet has documented about the delays for the public access of Mark Driscoll sermons by what has usually been a two week delay.  In a 2009 sermon from the Trial series Mark Driscoll explained the reasons why he would preach live at one campus and why the best sermon from a given Sunday would be edited, preserved on disc and sent to other campuses that would hear/see the sermon a week later, and then finally be published for outsiders to download or view two weeks later (usually).

From "Vision Notes from Pastor Mark" there is a brief statement about how nearly everyone misteaches Acts 6:1-7 but if the sermon Driscoll preached was what Mark Driscoll was going to claim was the right way to teach the text Mark Driscoll's competence as a scholar and exegete is beneath consideration at this point in the opinion of Wenatchee The Hatchet. 

What is apparent from other notes about sermons that have been relayed to Throckmorton

is that there has generally been one week, lately, of delay between "Live" and "Playback" and that the gap between May 4 and May 18 is two weeks.  It's possible Driscoll may have had some other speaking event or took a break (these things happen) but in light of previous journalistic coverage which has taken dates of public release to the Mars Hill web pages as the date a sermon was preached, well, all those editors and journalists now have to reconsider the timeliness of Driscoll's preaching if they just go to the Mars Hill website, look up a sermon, and attempt to take that publication date at face value.  By defending the edits of Driscoll's May 4 sermon Mars Hill Church has established for themselves that editing and redaction of Driscoll content happens. 

For past discussions at Wenatchee The Hatchet of some of these topics see below:

Friday, May 30, 2014

Pastor Tim Smith "Taking a Break", announcement of a pending planned sabbatical

It may be that a pastor at MH is about to take sabbatical.  Mars Hill pastors and staff don't usually get recorded as taking sabbaticals, let alone announce that a sabbatical is on the way, in terms of Mars Hill history, so that makes this otherwise mundane announcement unique in the documentable history of Mars Hill that Wenatchee The Hatchet has been able to observe so far. 

For those who don't have much background on Smith his role in the history of MHC has been documented a little at the following links:

Those links (if you've already read them) may help establish some context for the following content.  It would appear that there's a Tim Smith who has recently announced a pending sabbatical. 

How Tim Smith went from being Worship Pastor to being replaced with Dustin Kensrue and ending up as a campus pastor would be its own history-of-MH to explore at this point.  No one has been able to establish if there were any arrests or any leads in the vandalization of the Portland campus and for those who remember journalistic and blogging coverage from the Portland area at the time of that event there were some in the gay community who suspected the vandalization of Mars Hill Portland was more likely a false flag operation than an actual act of vandalism.  So, anyway, this announcement (such as it is) was conveyed to Wenatchee The Hatchet recently:

Portland | Priority Topic

Pastor Timothy Smith
From Pastor Timothy Smith:
Dear Mars Hill Portland Family,
It seems hard to believe but this coming August will mark 15 years since I drove into Pastor Mark’s driveway to move into his basement and join Mars Hill Church.  At that time it was a church plant of a couple hundred people meeting in a rented space in downtown Seattle.  It has been a joy and immense privilege to be a part of all God has done in the years followed; especially the most recent chapter of Mars Hill Portland.  To be totally honest, it has also been exhausting.
Over the years, I have rarely taken a “truly healing” break.  At times I have set an unwise pace for myself that is not sustainable.  This year has been more of a challenge than most as Mars Hill has been constantly been drawn up into conflict and controversy.
I’m a bit of a runner and sometimes, on a longer run, you start to develop a side ache.  I’ve learned over time that this is your body telling you that you are not breathing deeply enough.  You have to slow down, breathe deeply, and then it fades away and you can continue running.  I believe this is a very similar season for me.  I need to slow down for a bit, listen to what God is telling me, and get some rest so I can keep running in the next season.  
I brought this idea to our local elders here in Portland (Ryan Mount, Jeremy Anderson & Daniel Lowndes) as well as our executive elders across Mars Hill (Mark Driscoll, Dave Bruskas & Sutton Turner).  Both groups had the same response, “Of course you should take a break. It’s about time!”  I’m very blessed to have so many Godly brothers in Christ looking out for me with support and encouragement.  So, in light of all this, I will be taking a bit of a sabbatical this summer.  
A sabbatical is simply an extended Sabbath time.  The details are still coming together but I’m looking to take between 5 and 7 weeks off sometime between mid-June and mid-August.  As soon as plans are set I’ll let you know more.  
The great news is that we have outstanding pastors and leaders in place to take care of the church while I’m away.  Executive Deacon Kevin Kelly is doing a great job with the day-to-day operations of the church.  Without his help and expertise I couldn’t take this kind of a break.  Pastor Ryan Mount will take point on pastoral matters.  He and I worked together to plant this church and, along with Pastors Daniel & Jeremy, you will be well taken care of.
Worship on Sundays will be handled by a number of our local worship leaders as well as some special guests from time to time.  I hope you see this as an encouraging step towards health and sustainability for our church.  My family and I are beyond encouraged that this can happen and by all the support that has come along with it.  Please know that I will be back later in the summer.
I know some of you have been a churches where “sabbatical” is code for “he’s really looking for a graceful way to quit.”  I assure you that is not the case here.  I am more encouraged about the future of Mars Hill and more motivated on the mission of Jesus than ever!  I have simply run really hard for a decade and a half and, by God’s grace, I’m going to take an extra long vacation. [emphasis added]
Look for more details in the coming weeks and grab me on Sunday if you have any questions.
With much love and affection,
Pastor Tim Smith

Warren Throckmorton: ECFA inc onversation with MHC about Mars Hill Global

Thursday, May 29, 2014

one of Jamie Munson's grounds for the termination of Paul Petry, refusal to Ministry Coaching Program--questions about the role of Ministry Coaching International in relationship to MH circa 2007
from page 2
Pastor Paul Petry - Grounds for Immediate Termination of Employment
* continual insubordination and submission to leadership and spiritual authority
* Refusal to Ministry Coaching Program [emphasis added]* Divisive within Mars Hill Student Ministry and undermining of Pastor Adam, Deacons and entire ministry
* Blame shifting to Proxy leadership for misbehavior of children
* Public accusation of Lead Pastor [Jamie Munson] regarding hiding the real bylaw document
* Not following protocol and process for making bylaw comments by contacting church attorney without permission
* Ongoing contentious spirit to leadership regarding changes and direction

One of the things that has not been discussed much (if at all) is the subject of how far back some of the relationships members of the Mars Hill Church Board of Advisors and Accountability have had to the organization that was formerly known as Mars Hill Fellowship and now as Mars Hill Church.  Ostensibly the role of the BOAA is to have men who are neither members nor pastors of Mars Hill Church playing some kind of advisory role that avoids a conflict of interest and provides disinterested oversight.  However, it is not clear that some or even all of the members of the BOAA have necessarily even had to make the case for why any of them are truly disinterested parties. 

For the sake of review, it seems that the Ministry Coaching Program Jamie Munson made reference to would refer to Ministry Coaching International and at least two Mars Hill Church leaders over the years have had formal ties to the organization, Dave Kraft and Michael Van Skaik.
Officers, Directors, Trustees and Key Employees
Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2011
Greg Salciccioli
Richard Savidge
Chris ALtig
Barry Engelman
Michael Van Skaik
Jim White
John Warton
Daniel Harkavy

Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2007
Greg Salciccioli
Jim White
Dennis Blevins
Michael Van Skaik
Daniel Harkavy
Tim Cahill
John Warton

This web page was cached by Zoom Information Inc on 12/14/2013

So as recently as April 2013 there was some listing for Michael Van Skaik having a role on the Board of Directors at Ministry Coaching International.  What's more notable, for the sake of considering the terminations and trial of Paul Petry in 2007 in particular is that Michael Van Skaik was listed as being on the Board of Directors at Ministry Coaching International in the year that Petry was fired and the grounds for Petry's immediate termination were outlined in email.

One of the questions that no one has raised so far amid any controversy or coverage of Mars Hill Church is who Paul Petry's coach in affiliation with Ministry Coaching International would have been.  If one of Munson's stated reasons for the immediate termination of Paul Petry was that Petry was refusing to cooperate with a coaching program that may have involved someone who is now on the Board of Advisors and Accountability then this could be considered evidence that Ministry Coaching International (for which Michael Van Skaik was member of the board of directors in 2007) had some kind of business relationship or formal relationship with Mars Hill Church and that Petry's alleged refusal to cooperate with the coaching program was considered a basis for termination.  Was Mars Hill Church paying money to Ministry Coaching International in any capacity circa 2006-2007? 

Who were the coaches assigned by MCI to handle coaching of pastors at Mars Hill Church?  Petry's alleged refusal to participate seemed to be considered serious enough by Jamie Munson in 2007 to be a ground for immediate termination but now that these grounds for termination have been made public they open up secondary questions about the nature of the relationships people connected to Ministry Coaching International went on to have with the leadership culture of Mars Hill Church.  How can Mars Hill Church (or anyone else, for that matter) be convinced that the BOAA is made up of men who have an impartial interest in the effective management of the church if Michael Van Skaik was on the board of directors of an organization that may have been contracted with Mars Hill circa 2006-2007 to coach? 

For that matter, given Michael Van Skaik's historic role on the Board of Directors and given Dave Kraft's history of being an employee of the organization Mars Hill Church members it's worth asking another question about the 2007 trial of Paul Petry.  If Michael Van Skaik was on the Board of Directors for Ministry Coaching International in 2007 and Dave Kraft had a longstanding ministry affiliation with MCI then couldn't Dave Kraft's presence on the EIT investigating the legitimacy of Munson's charges against Petry be considered a significant conflict of interest in itself at least in potential if not in practice?  If one of the stated reasons Munson gave for terminating Paul Petry was his refusal to cooperate with the Ministry Coaching program why put an employee or formal associate of Ministry Coaching International on the EIT in the first place? 

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Mars Hill Church leader Phil Poirier has left, Throckmorton discusses non-compete clauses and Mars Hill

also presented without comment, for now

Throckmorton: Dalton Roraback has left Mars Hill

presented without comment, for now

Warren Throckmorton publishes invoices from ResultSource to Mark Driscoll courtesy of Mars Hill, an overview of controversy around Real Marriage

WORLD magazine documents that Mars Hill Church contracted with RSI to get Real Marriage on to the NYT bestseller list at #1
It's worth noting that when the story broke Mars Hill Church representative Justin Dean described the relationship the church had with ResultSource as a marketing investment.

"Mars Hill has made marketing investments for book releases and sermon releases, along with album releases, events, and church plants, much like many other churches, authors, and publishers who want to reach a large audience. We will explore any opportunity that helps us to get that message out, while striving to remain above reproach in the process. Whether we're talking about technology, music, marketing, or whatever, we want to tell lots of people about Jesus by every means available. That's what we're all about and have been since 1996."

As for the contract itself, it has been available for public review for a while.
Warren Throckmorton published the contract here:

Now the contract was signed shortly before Mars Hill Church began a series in late 2011 called "God's Work, Our Witness", which was also the same title of a fundraising film distributed to Mars Hill members with the FY2011 annual report.  In the film Driscoll gently rebuked Mars Hill Church across space and time as generally stinking at giving.
Shortly after the story of the RSI contract broke the Mars Hill Board of Advisors and Accountability issued a public statement:

They stated the idea for the use of RSI came from "outside counsel" and that while it was not illegal it was unwise. So while the BOAA has claimed that the idea came from "outside counsel" rather than from someone inside Mars Hill this statement does not establish much.  Was this "outside counsel" outside counsel to Mars Hill at the time the idea was proposed or was it possible the idea was proposed from someone or some group that is only "outside counsel" since the time the idea was proposed?  Since Driscoll has had a history of saying that headship means it's the husband's responsibility even if it isn't his fault (and an inferential case for this could be made from the OT laws regarding vows that a husband fails to nullify once he overhears them) then in terms of the history of Mars Hill Church and its counsel to members from the pulpit, it seems like it basically shouldn't have mattered who the outside counsel was or even how outside they were.

While the book caused a bit of a stir when it was published in 2012 the question of whether or not the ideas and words in Mark and Grace Driscoll's Real Marriage were entirely their own was not raised until 2014, when Janet Mefferd accused Mark Driscoll on air of being a plagiarist.  Mefferd was not the only person to raise questions about whether Mark Driscoll had appropriated the ideas of other authors without adequate citation.  Wenatchee the Hatchet presented a comparison of Grace Driscoll's chapter 7 of Real Marriage to Dan Allender's chapter 9 of The Wounded Heart on September 30, 2013 before Janet Mefferd made her on-air accusation to Mark Driscoll. Wenatchee The Hatchet also documented that Grace Driscoll was familiar with Allender's work and publicly said so as far back as 2000, and that at a Mens' Retreat in 2006 Mark Driscoll was aware of Allender's work and listed it as a reference to be consulted on the subject of sexual abuse

Since the start of 2014 the publishers of Mark Driscoll's books have been amending the citation errors:

In a letter addressed to Mars Hill Church members since March 5, 2014 that was distributed through The City, Mark Driscoll addressed the subject of Mars Hill Church using ResultSource

... First, a marketing company called ResultSource was used in conjunction with the book Real Marriage, which was released in January 2012. My understanding of the ResultSource marketing strategy was to maximize book sales, so that we could reach more people with the message and help grow our church. In retrospect, I no longer see it that way. Instead, I now see it as manipulating a book sales reporting system, which is wrong. I am sorry that I used this strategy, and will never use it again. I have also asked my publisher to not use the "#1 New York Times bestseller" status in future publications, and am working to remove this from past publications as well.

With all that in mind, Warren Throckmorton has published two invoices to Mark Driscoll from late 2011

Justin Dean has responded to an enquiry from Throckmorton about who at Mars Hill Church was responsible for the Result Source agreement and Justin Dean's reply was that he would not be responding with any comments at any time.

Given Justin Dean's established history of making public statements that end up being countered not only by outside organizations but to a lesser degree by the Mars Hill Board of Advisors and Accountability and even Mark Driscoll himself it may be that in this case, at least in the opinion of Wenatchee The Hatchet, Justin Dean wasn't going to be able to say anything that might not create more confusion anyway.

While Throckmorton reports that Thomas Hurst and Jason Skelton explained that Mark Driscoll was not involved in the ResultSource decision process because he removed himself it remains to be seen if Hurst and Skelton can clarify this for themselves.  Since Mark Driscoll has been the legal president of Mars Hill Church since 2011 and it was his book that was being promoted and his name on the invoices Warren Throckmorton has published Driscoll could clear things up by clarifying whether it was his money or the money of the church that was used to pay for the ResultSource agreement.  If it was something Driscoll paid for personally would this protect him from what blogger James Duncan considered probable inurement?  That the invoice was issued to Mark Driscoll courtesy of Mars Hill Church means we can't know for sure since it's not possible to establish from just two invoices whether the invoices were to the individual courtesy of the organization or to the individual as the legal president of the organization.  We'd need to see who actually cut the checks for the payments for these invoices, wouldn't we?

Mark Driscoll's letter to members that was published on The City could make it seem as though he had some clear idea of what the nature of the contract was and he even went so far as to claim that as of 2014 he sees the contract as having been wrong. 

But for the moment no one at Mars Hill Church has fielded the evidence of plagiarism in several spots of Real Marriage.  The citation problems have been getting fixed, as documented by Warren Throckmorton, but the full scale of the Real Marriage issue has not been publicly addressed and it is not certain that even within Mars Hill Church members and staff have been made fully aware that Mars Hill Church contracted with ResultSource to buy a #1 spot on the NYT bestsseller list for a Mark and Grace Driscoll book that was (to go by the rear-guard amendations Thomas Nelson has been making this year) legitimately stated to have plagiarized the works of other authors ranging from Dan Allender to Justin & Lindsey Holcomb who were still participating in church life at Mars Hill in 2011 at the time the contract was signed by Sutton Turner with ResultSource.

Since Mark Driscoll mentioned that in 2014 he realized that the contract manipulated sales and that that was wrong let's see if in light of that partial confession there's some context for these Old Testament passages (citations are NIV)

Leviticus 19:35
"'Do not use dishonest standards when measuring length, weight or quantity.

Deuteronomy 25:13-16
 Do not have two differing weights in your bag—one heavy, one light. Do not have two differing measures in your house—one large, one small. You must have accurate and honest weights and measures, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you. For the Lord your God detests anyone who does these things, anyone who deals dishonestly

Proverbs 11:1
The LORD detests dishonest scales, but accurate weights find favor with him.

Proverbs 20:10
Differing weights and differing measures-- the LORD detests them both.

Proverbs 20:23
The LORD detests differing weights, and dishonest scales do not please him.

Amos 8:4-6
Hear this, you who trample the needy
    and do away with the poor of the land,
“When will the New Moon be over
    that we may sell grain,
and the Sabbath be ended
    that we may market wheat?”
skimping on the measure,
    boosting the price
    and cheating with dishonest scales,
 buying the poor with silver
    and the needy for a pair of sandals,
    selling even the sweepings with the wheat.

Micah 6:11
Shall I acquit someone with dishonest scales,
    with a bag of false weights?

Dishonest scales and fraudulent measures don't look like they're things that God overlooks.