Emerging Morality
January 3rd, 2007
(By John MacArthur)
The following is adapted from John’s upcoming book, The Truth War (Nelson, Spring 2007).
In some of our earlier posts, we’ve highlighted the ethical disconnect demonstrated by some within the emerging church.
A secular writer doing an article on the Emerging Church movement and postmodern Christianity summed up the character of the movement this way: “What makes a postmodern ministry so easy to embrace is that it doesn’t demonize youth culture—Marilyn Manson, ‘South Park,’ or gangsta rap, for example—like traditional fundamentalists. Postmodern congregants aren’t challenged to reject the outside world” (Lori Leibovich, “Generation: A Look Inside Fundamentalism’s Answer to MTV: The Postmodern Church,” 77).
It’s not really that surprising, then, to learn that more and more voices within the emerging movement are suggesting that evangelicals should back away from confronting western culture over moral evils like abortion and homosexuality. Tony Campolo, for example, explained to a reporter why he wrote his book Speaking My Mind:
My purpose in writing the book was to communicate loud and clear that I felt that evangelical Christianity had been hijacked. When did it become anti-feminist? When did evangelical Christianity become anti-gay? When did it become supportive of capital punishment? Pro-war? When did it become so negative towards other religious groups?
Nor is it surprising that Brian McLaren says he is not sure “what we should think about homosexuality.” He called for a five-year moratorium on making any pronouncements about whether homosexuality is a sin or not. “In five years, if we have clarity, we’ll speak” he said. “If not, we’ll set another five years for ongoing reflection.”
In an effort to appeal to postmodern culture, some within the emerging church have shied away from confronting even the most blatant evils that mark contemporary American society.
Isaiah speaks of the Emerging Morality…
Isaiah 5:20
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
John Macarthur is right to declare a truth war because…
Romans 14:16
Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil;
All blessings,
Jeremiah Henson
“it doesn’t demonize youth culture … like traditional fundamentalists”
I’m not sure if we can nail it down to be this simple. For the most part this statement may be true, but not in every case.
I was dialouging with a younger Christian about Marilyn Mason the other night.
I listened to his thoughts, and I shared mine. Then we went to the Scriptures, and laid all our thoughts upon the authority of God’s truth.
The outcome was good, because we both agree that the Word of God is God’s Word on every matter.
If people like Campolo, and McLaren, don’t embrace the Scriptures, then how can we even begin to have serious interchange of thoughts? We can’t really.
I would surely love to speak with anyone, Brian, Tony, even Marilyn Manson. But I always end up going to the Bible, and to the Gospel. For this is my authority. And that can be the end of conversation for some.
Christians should base all ideas on morality from scripture. That is obvious of course. We also should strive to always ‘mold’ our lives to the Word, that also being obvious. I am certain that Brian Mclaren would agree with those principles.
I am a little confused though. While Mclaren’s followers seem eager to reassure everyone that he is in fact, orthodox in his beliefs, he himself has pronounced that he doesn’t know what to think concerning homosexuality, and it may take years for him and unspecified others to come to an understanding. While on the surface that may seem humble, gentle, and patient, Brian needs to be reassured by a more spiritually mature elder that despite his confusion, the scriptures are clearly and consistently against all deviant sexual practices, including homosexuality, as well bestiality, adultery, etc.
My confusion comes from the fact that He recently spoke at this church in Little Rock, which is pastored by a gay man and his partner.
http://www.sherwoodopendoor.org/gallery2006.html
if Brian Mclaren is unsure of his position on homosexuality, I can allow the grace of Christ to work on his heart and reveal the scriptures to him. However, his speaking at a church pastored by a homosexual suggests he has already made his decision concerning homosexuality, that he is in fact favorable to it-which, we know, is contrary to the faith and practice of Christians.
I hope Brian Mclaren’s followers will gently exhort and remind him to take heed and not support those who treat the body and blood of our Lord in an unworthy manner.
I will pray for Brian, and myself, to always ‘practice what we preach’. Inconsistency is bad for the Gospel, both to believers and unbelievers alike.
Perhaps his appearance will be followed by an official pronouncement?
I agree with the above post, but I propose a modification. McLaren (and anyone else who agrees with him) should be confronted boldly and publicly, not gently exhorted. All in the church should be warned out loud to reject and avoid him. Those who claim allegiance to Christ but reject cardinal doctrines and refuse to confront sin are false teachers. To allow them any influence at all in the church is sinful for us who are shepherds of the flock.
In a private conversation with McLaren and others like him, I would indeed speak the truth in love from the Scriptures. But to allow such men to promote “conversation” in the church is to allow the precious flock to be poisoned.
“Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.”
I’m not ashamed to call you brother, Jim Harris. And I’m not ashamed to call Brian McLaren brother, either.
Even though I’ve never met you, and even though I might not feel comfortable in either of your services.
If Jesus calls both of you brothers, then I must not disavow my own family.
I may have come from a dysfunctional family, but part of my sanctification eventually means that I don’t bring my family dysfunction into my New Family.
Whyte Stonne,
The question is not so much whether Brian McClaren is a brother or not. The question pertains to his causing others to stumble because of his actions, his selective denial of truth so clearly found in God’s word. If we believe the best about him, then we believe he is a brother who is contradicting Scripture for some reason.
The Holy Spirit is clear on homosexuality:
1 Corinthians 6:1-11 Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? 2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? 4 So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? 5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, 6 but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers? 7 Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? 8 On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren. 9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.
God the Holy Spirit, lamenting the foolishness of the lawsuits between Corinthian brethren, reminds them that they are competent to judge among ourselves, settingly issues of right and wrong (Verse 5). As the passage flows, God the Holy Spirit makes an interesting statement about those who do not repent of sin (including the sin of homosexual behavior)they will not inherit the kingdom of God (vv. 9-10). But thankfully, there is deliverance from this sin as we are able to turn from it through our new life in Christ (v. 11)–”And such WERE some of you…”
The Holy Spirit provides a list of behaviors that indicate an unchanged heart… But by His grace, we have victory over the practice of these sins when we are born again (”and such were some of you…”. Brian McClaren by his presence and by his pronouncements strays from God’s word. If we love Him, then we will confront Him (Matthew 18:15-17). Were he merely a person in a congregation and not a person of visibility (i.e. pastor/elder type) then we would be loathe to confront his sin publicly without a series of private confrontations. However, as God the Holy Spirit says:
1 Timothy 5:19-20 19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses. 20 Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning.
Brian McClaren has publicly engaged in conduct and teachings which seeminlgy contradict Scripture. Because he is a teacher (i.e. pastor and published author)he incurs a stricter judgment. As the God the Holy Spirit says:
James 3:1 Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment.
When Brian McClaren claims Scripture is not clear on homosexuality he is mistaken (pay particular attention to verses 26-27).
Romans 1:18-32 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.
Notice the sins included in the list of lawless and rebellous deeds as it is also grouped by God the Holy Spirit with that which is contrary to sound teaching.
1 Timothy 1:8-11 8 But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers 10 and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.
The Holy Spirit tells us in 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 to take note of those who reject the apostolic teaching. We are to admonish them as a brother not an enemy.
Brian McClaren is a brother who plays fast and loose with the words of the Holy Spirit. His public statements, written, spoken, and otherwise–particularly his conduct endorsing a practicing homosexual minister—his refusal to support the sound teaching of the Holy Spirit recorded in the Scriptures move him into the category of a sinning brother for whom we must pray, grieve—and if we truly love him— we must confront according to the words of God (i.e. the Holy Spirit) recorded so clearly in His written word (Romans 1:18-32; 1 Timothy 1:8-11; 1 Corinthians 6:1-11; ).
Because his sins are very public (http://www.sherwoodopendoor.org/gallery2006.html), they must be publicly confronted—Matthew 18:15-17; 1 Timothy 5:19-20; James 3:1; John 14:15.
In His Grace,
Keith Crosby
Green Bay, Wisconsin
PS: By the way, I was wondering about your view on the literal reality of the death and bodily resurrection of Christ… I’ve mentioned it before in previous posts… Do you believe it is a literal bodily resurrection, a “spiritual” resurection, or metaphorical?
Brother Keith,
The Romans 1 passage bears a close look. I would agree with you that “The Holy Spirit is clear on homosexuality,” and on several other issues as well.
I can make several vitally important statements drawn directly from verses 28 thru 32. To ignore these sins in ourselves and in our congregations is perilous, since as “teachers” we are subject to a stricter judgment.
1) People filled with greed are worthy of death.
2) People filled with envy are worthy of death.
3) People filled with malice are worthy of death.
4) People filled with strife are worthy of death.
5) People who gossip are worthy of death.
6) Slanderers are worthy of death.
7) Haters of God and disobedient children are equally worthy of death.
8) People who are arrogant and boastful are worthy of death.
9) Unloving people are worthy of death.
10) Unmerciful people are worthy of death.
This is deadly serious stuff we’re dealing with here.
Keith, the Scriptures teach a literal bodily resurrection. What else would I believe? A literal bodily resurrection is the only thing that maks sense if you read the Bible.
Here’s one for you. When you preach from Ecclesiastes, do you make a distinction between what you think is spiritually reliable and what you think is spiritually unreliable?
To Donsands and Jim Harris,
Donsands, you said, “If people like Campolo, and McLaren, don’t embrace the Scriptures, then how can we even begin to have serious interchange of thoughts? We can’t really.”
Exactly right, my Brother. Too much conversation and we can end up unequally yoked. And you’re right their authority is different from yours. Different presuppositions lead to different conclusions.
Jim Harris, you said, “…I propose a modification. McLaren (and anyone else who agrees with him) should be confronted boldly and publicly, not gently exhorted.”
You could NOT be more right. The biblical example for dealing with false teachers, whether in the Old Covenant or the New Covenant is to PUBLICLY oppose them, PUBLICLY expose them, and then PUBLICLY eliminate them from the assembly of believers. Moses did this (stoning the false prophet in Deut. 18), Jesus did this, Paul did this, and it is all over Scripture. (Matthew 18 is for personal things between believers.)
The reasons are three: 1. Publicly identify with Christ. 2. Defend the assembly from error, thus saving souls and correcting the error that has already been introduced into the body so that individual believers can be made orthodox again. 3. To install the proper fear of God in members of the assembly to examine their walk and doctrine. Search out the Scriptures, and I think you will find this is correct. If not, please correct me.
Great comments, both, my Brothers. Fight the good fight.
In Christ,
Phil Perkins.
When you talk about “Emerging church” are you talking about
1) “Emergent Village” which is a set group of people who are discussing theology (Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, Brian McLaren)
or
2) are you talking about all the churches which have been labeled as emerging or are doing church and minstry in a different manner.
1) People filled with greed are worthy of death.
How much time do you spend tracking your mileage for the IRS? How do you feel when your board is nickel and diming you and your wife has to go without?
2) People filled with envy are worthy of death.
Do you want to be a successful pastor? Who inspires you as an example? Who do you try to emulate in your preaching
Solomon wrote: “And I saw that all labor and all achievement spring from man’s envy of his neighbor.” (Ecclesiastes 4:4)
At a meeting of pastors, have you ever heard someone ask, “So, how many did you have in church Sunday?”
3) People filled with malice are worthy of death.
When you preach, are you ever getting even with people in the past who insulted you, or wounded you, or kept you from something that was rightfully yours? It’s easy to get even with them when they’re not there.
Have you ever hurt someone under the “cloak of authority”?
4) People filled with strife are worthy of death.
Do fights and turmoil fill your life and ministry? Do you make every effort to preserve the bond of unity with people, or would you rather stand for the truth and let the chips, and the souls, fall where they may?
5) People who gossip are worthy of death.
Do you gossip about people? Do you “share” unflattering and destructive facts about other pastors? about your parishoners? about ministers in other denominations or ministries? Or, do you share detailed “prayer concerns” instead?
Do you tolerate gossips in your congregation or confront them and root them out?
6) Slanderers are worthy of death.
Do you say truthful things with the intent of damaging a person’s reputation?
When a person has left your congregation after a difficult situation, have you ever finally told concerned individuals in your congregation “the truth” about that person in order to justify your actions?
Have you ever told your people accurate and truthful things about fallen televangelists or pastors from other denominations in order to tarnish them?
7) Haters of God and disobedient children are equally worthy of death.
If you are a youth leader, have you ever told your charges this, that disobeying their parents is just as bad as hating God?
Have you ever supported a crusade against disobedient children from your pulpit, and urged legislation against the pernicious sin of childhood disobedience?
The Bible does command us to have our rebellious, incorrigible sons stoned by the community, you know. (Deuteronomy 21:18-12) “You must purgethe evil from among you.”
8) People who are arrogant and boastful are worthy of death.
Arrogance is a very subjective quality which is hard to see in oneself. We can defend ourselves against charges of arrogance, usually with claims that we are right, that our actions are justified, and our beliefs are correct. We Christians have probably all been arrogant at some time or other in our lives.
I have actually been told I am arrogant on occasion. Can you imagine?
9) Unloving people are worthy of death.
It is much easier to be unloving that you might imagine. It is especially easy to be unloving if you inevitably, reflexively have to qualify “love” with “righteousness” or “holiness.”
It is easy to be unloving if you place God’s honor ahead of God’s love, which is not at all Scriptural.
Boasting? Have you ever bragged about your average attendance? Have you ever made sure to mention the number of baptisms you had last week?
10) Unmerciful people are worthy of death.
Have you ever reminded your wife or husband about something they did or said months ago in the middle of a fight?
God promises to “throw away all our sins into the deepest sea” (Micah 7:19).
Let’s follow his example.
“If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”
Whyte Stonne,
All the sins you have listed are in deed as worthy as death as is homosexuality. We should preach against all those practices since the Holy Spirit so clearly identifies them. In fact, when I dealt with the homosexual issue about 2 years ago for my present congregation, I used 1 Corinthians 6 because of the list it gives. No one who is engaged in a pattern of unrepentant sin (thieves, slanderers, murderers, etc…) should think themselves morally or spiritually superior to a practicing homosexual who is unrepentant. As Jesus taught those who looked at a woman with impure thoughts were themselves guilty of adultery. All sin is worthy of death.
That’s what 1 Corinthians 6:11 means when it says, “and such were some of you” before we were saved. Brian McClaren teaches something different than what the Holy Spirit teaches about homosexuality and his presence in a homosexual pastored church affirms that pastor’s sin.
God despises all sin equally. When a person burns a cd illegally, that person engages in a sin worthy of death–theft. When a person looks at a woman with lust–he engages in a sin worthy of death. And when a person engages in homosexual conduct–he or she engages in a sin worthy of death.
And when Brian McClaren says that homosexuality might not be a sin, he engages in a sin worthy of death.
We are all sinners, aren’t we. Brian McClaren has done his publicly and invites public rebuke, according to the Scriptures.
As for the book of Ecclesiastes, I preached Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 last Sunday. It is the governing thought of the entire book.
When all is said and done we must lives lives that demonstrate our fear (awe/reference–yare’) of God as acts of worship. We live lives that demonstrate our attentiveness to His law. God expects that of every person and judges our actions and motives accordingly.
Lives lived absent this relationship and devotion to God are wasted regardless of accomplishment, education, or wealth.
Ecclesiastes 6:3-4 3 If a man fathers a hundred children and lives many years, however many they be, but his soul is not satisfied with good things and he does not even have a proper burial, then I say, “Better the miscarriage than he, 4 for it comes in futility and goes into obscurity; and its name is covered in obscurity.
A life lived outside of a relationship with God is better off have never taken place for it goes to hell and suffers for its deeds, rather than receiving grace. A miscarriage is death before racking up a raft of sin and suffering for them.
The soul not satisfied with God is miserable in this life and the next.
All of Ecclesiastes is good spiritual food. After all it is God breathed and profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness so that the man of God is adequate and equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Now a person can yank verses out of context and try and make them say things they do not say…but a sound hermeneutic and patient work in the study prevents that.
Ecclesiastes is not a collection of verses it is propositional truth with a larger governing thought and if we apply ourselves we can understand it clearly…but we were talking about Brian McClaren and his stand on homosexuality…
By the way, thanks for answering the question on the resurrection—you’re right it is literal, the Bible says so clearly… as clearly as it deals with the homosexual issue. Words have meaning and are understandable when we apply ourselves.
In His Grace, as sinner saved by grace, who deserved death,
Keith Crosby
Green Bay, Wisconsin
Keith, I don’t mean to spam, but here is something I posted in an older thread to Scott G. recently.
* * * * * * * *
There is clarity in Romans 1 & 2, but the “real point” Paul makes there is virtually ignored by evangelicals. If you follow Paul’s argument, you need to watch for his famous “therefore.”
Paul’s “therefore” indicates the point of his argument.
“You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.”
Paul has laid a trap, and many of us fall right into it.
For most anti-gay crusaders, Romans 1 & 2 are the main Pauline justification for their campaign.
Do you believe this is legitimate justification? Is Romans 1 & 2 adequate justification for an anti-gay crusade?
* * * * * * * *
The list in I Corinthians 6 is a much tidier text to preach from than Romans 1 & 2, since there seem to be so few murderers and thieves in the pews, as compared to malicious, slanderous, arrogant and unmerciful gossips in the pulpits.
“live lives that demonstrate our attentiveness to His law”
Very encouraging words.
Not only 1 Cor. 6, and Rom. 1&2, but also Gal 5 should be preached from the pulpit as well.
The holy law of God is written on the hearts of His children. The Holy Spirit sees to that.
Like the Psalmnist we should say,
“I hate and abhor lying,
But I love Your law.
…
Great peace have those who love Your law,
And nothing causes them to stumble.
…
And Your law is my delight.
…
I have gone astray like a lost sheep;
Seek Your servant,
For I do not forget Your commandments.” Psalm 119:163,165,174,176
There’s a war between the Spirit and flesh. Gal. 5
And it shall always be so in this life, but God’s holy ones will hate ungodliness, though there is a remnant of it still with us after regeneration, and we will fight it. However sin has lost its grip on us, and righteousness has grip our hearts instead.
One more thought on Romans 1:
“…who, knowing the righteous judgement of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also APPROVE of those who practice them.” verse 32
Phil,
I am humbled and encouraged by your words as well.
Thanks for sharing your heart.
“Cursed is everyne who does not continue to de everything written in the Book of the Law.”
“Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.”
“You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.”
The problem here is this: being Bible believers we easily descend into these little battles where we shoot our little Bible-bullets at one another.
This is possibly the main way in which “The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.”
We all need to look at Galatians 5:13-15. And I am honestly including myself as coming within the scope of Paul’s rebuke.
“You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.”
Do you really want to live by the written code which stands against you?
“God forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that was opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.”
Why do you cling to the Law? “Law brings wrath. Where there is no law there is no transgression.” Do you want to perpetuate transgression forever?
Why do you cling to the Law? “Sin is not taken into account when there is no law.” Why do you insist that sin be taken into account?
Christ died for our sins, the sins of the whole world, for the forgiveness of sins. Yet you seem bound and determined to preserve sin in the world through your persistent application of the law to yourselves and to those born outside the jurisdiction of the law.
Do you want to be free of the yoke of sin? “Sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law but under grace.”
“Apart from the law, sin is dead.”
“Now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.”
Stay bound by the written code if that’s your choice. Stay bound by sin if that’s what you want.
White Stonne - How do you know when some particular act is sin or not?
Is not the law a “mirror” for all to see ourselves as we truly are and see our need to be saved?
Is showing someone their sin with the law a right way to share the gospel?
Didn’t Paul say that the “law of the Lord is perfect converting the soul” and that it “is good if it is used lawfully.” 1 Tim 1:8-11
Jerry, it’ll take me a few hours to get back to you. I have some housework to do.
Whyte Stonne,
You’ve missed the point… what has this to do with 1 Cor. 6 and other passages.
Jerry, you asked, “How do you know when some particular act is sin or not?”
I know this may seem simplistic to some people, but Paul pretty much summed up in Galatians 5 how we are supposed to live. Here and in many other places the emphasis is on being filled with the Holy Spirit.
“If you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.”
So if you are filled with the Holy Spirit and being led by the Spirit, that’s enough. “You are not under law.” You don’t continue to measure yourself by the written code. If you attempt to measure yourself by your conformity to the written code, then you are into self-justification, not justification by faith.
If you are being led by the Spirit, you will automatically know you are not in the Spirit. If you are hardening yourself against the leading of the Holy Spirit, God can use other means to keep you “abiding in Him.” But your FIRST CHOICE of discernment is to keep close to the Spirit of God within you.
Jesus said, “The kingdom of God is within you.”
Now, in the “written code” Paul tells us that “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such there is no law.”
Fruit grows naturally from a tree. A tree doesn’t have to struggle and study and work to grow fruit. God sends the rains and the sunshine, the tree is genetically set to sink its roots into the ground, and fruit grows in its season.
(I like Psalm 1 very much in this regard, if you keep in mind that Jesus and Paul agree that we live by the Law of Love, and neither a Hebrew Torah nor a Greek Torah.)
Be a tree. Sink your roots deep into God. Drink in the “rivers of living water,” let them bubble out of you like a fountain. There is refreshment in the living waters. The fruit will follow. No grunting and struggling necessary.
“Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit.”
It’s not easy to “Let go and let God,” yet this comes really close to capturing what it is to live in the Spirit, to keep in step with the Spirit.
Many people call this the Sabbath Rest, where we stop struggling and striving. Different people have different struggles.
Some of us struggle to prove something to somebody. [”You no good kid.” “You’ll never amount to anything.” “You’re just like your father.”]
Some of us struggle to be the best. [Nobody is ever going to beat me again!” “They may not like me, but I’m smarter than any of them.” (hmm…) “You only got a 98%? What happened?”
Some of us struggle to conform to the “demands of Scripture.” This is a particular problem for “The People of the Book,” as we sometimes call ourselves.
Our big problem is that we have turned the Greek Scriptures into our Christian Torah. We study the Scriptures, thinking that in them we have eternal life, but refuse to come to the living Christ, the living truth.
When we refuse to walk in the Spirit, then we struggle in the flesh to figure everything out. That’s why we’re told in Hebrews “to make every effort to enter that rest.” It’s far too easy to live in the flesh: going to church, singing the songs, struggling to stop sinning, feeling guilty if we read the newspaper or watch TV or drink a Strawberry Margarita, fighting over doctrines and styles of ministry . . .
You have a simple choice. “Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.”
Do you feel free? Or do you feel bound up, afraid of making a mistake, afraid of misinterpreting some verse, burdened with the task of living the Christian life.
If you feel bound up, afraid, and burdened by the struggle, you need to come to Christ. “Come unto me all who are burdened and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”
The author of Hebrews wrote, “There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from his.”
If your Christian ministry is a difficult burden, and you feel like your Christian life is a great struggle, you are laboring in the flesh and are still under the Law.
Christ’s yoke is easy and his burden is light.
“Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall by following their example of disobedience.”
If you don’t find the Sabbath-rest, the rest for your soul that Jesus promised, then you may fall by following the example of disobedience we see in O.T. Israel.
Paul wrote about “some false brothers [who] had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ and to make us slaves.” Slaves? Slaves to the Written Code.
“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.”
When Paul wrote that “A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough,” he was talking about the living by a written code instead of walking in the Spirit.
You asked how we can know if a particular act is sin or not. That really is irrelevant now. You may “catch” one sinful act now, and miss the next four after lunch.
“Cursed is everyne who does not continue to de everything written in the Book of the Law.”
If you really believe and live like catching sins before they happen matters much, then you are under the curse for all the ones you miss. Sorry. End of story.
Because we are no longer under the law, several things are true:
“Where there is no law there is no transgression.”
“Sin is not taken into account when there is no law.”
“Apart from the law, sin is dead.”
You are not under the law. There is no need to worry about whether this particular act is a sin or not. No need to worry. Walk in the Spirit. Love your neighbor and you’ve met the law’s demands. There is no law against love.
Walk in the Spirit and love your neighbor, no matter how much people try to enslave you with the Law.
Excellent points, Eddie. I appreciate your concern for reaching out to people who need God. There is definitely a legitimate and lawful use of the law in evangelism.
In his first epistle to Timothy he wrote, “We also know that the law is not laid down for the just.” The Bible is not applicable to the just, for Christians, as the passages in Galatians and Romans demonstrate.
The just live by faith, Christians live without reference to the law. Otherwise they fall under the condemnation of the law when they attempt to justify their conduct and doctrine according to the written code.
The variety of translations of I Timothy 1:8 is really interesting. “We know that the law is good:
…if a man uses it properly.”
…if a man uses it lawfully.”
…when used legitimately.”
…if a man makes a right use of it.”
…if it is used as it was meant to be used.”
The *perfect* law is “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus [which] hath made me free from the law of sin and death.”
The Torah, the Old Testament law, was not and is not the “law of liberty,” but is “the law of sin and of death.” (Romans 8:2)
1) If the Old Testament law IS good when a man uses it properly, lawfully, legitimately, the way it was meant to be used, then
2) The law is NOT good when a man uses it improperly, unlawfully, illegitimately, or in a way it was NOT meant to be used.
3) If a man uses the law improperly, unlawfully, and illegitimately in his ministry, in a way which ministers condemnation and death to believers, in a way which brings Christians into enslavement and bondage to the law instead of bringing us to the glorious liberty of the sons of God, then
4) I wouldn’t trust that man’s use of the law in evangelism. That man only knows how to establish bondage to the written code. That man only knows how to “make us slaves” to the written code. I don’t believe that man knows how to bring someone from bondage to sin into the freedom and rest Christ promised.
5) If I were such a man, I would repent of my unlawful use of the written code. Following the example of Paul, I would “retreat to Arabia” in order to re-evaluate my entire understanding of the ways of God and my entire understanding of the Scriptures. I would refrain from presumptuous teaching and preaching duties. I would earnestly desire to learn how to become “a minister of the new covenant–not of the letter, but of the Spirit.”
6) I am such a man.
Sorry Whyte.
The practicing homosexual pastor is sinning. As well, so is Brian Mclaren when he endorses or supports that.
Him bieng unrepentant about his fornication, and brian being unrepentant about sharing in the public affirmation of that act, displays much concerning them.
We must, however this makes you uncomfortable due to your own experience, take note of these men and let them know they are sinning.
Hi Keith. I don’t think I missed the point. I was responding to the eulogy to the Law donsands made, primarily citing the Psalms. I was demonstrating to him that the Law is against us, that it only brings condemnation and death. Furthermore, I emphasized to donsands that:
The “Law brings wrath.” (Romans 4:15a)
“Where there is no law there is no transgression.” (Romans 4:15b)
“Sin is not taken into account when there is no law.” (Romans 5:13b)
“Apart from the law, sin is dead.” (Romans 7:8b)
The Scripture passages you cite, Romans 1:18-32 and I Corinthians 6:1-11, share much in common, and I want to highlight one element briefly.
Each has the sins of believers and the apparently “worse” sins of unbelievers in a specific relationship. The sins of the believers are the real focus of Paul’s purpose, not the sins of the anonymous outsiders. The sins of the unbelievers are discussed in Paul’s process of rebuking the believers.
The Corinthian passage teaches us that we will judge the world and will judge angels. That is a tremendous degree of authority. In John 20:21 Jesus tells the disciples that the primary result of receiving the Holy Spirit is the authority to forgive sins: “If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven. If you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”
When Jesus prayed that God forgive the people who were crucifying him, he didn’t say, “Father, forgive them if they repent later on.” He said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” Likewise, Stephen prayed “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” Forgiveness of sins is possible without repentance. This is demonstrated in Jesus’ forgiveness from the cross, Stephen’s forgiveness while being stoned, and the authority Christ gives us in John 20:21.
Keith, you have been given authority, exousia, on earth while you are alive. One aspect of your authority is to forgive people their sins. Not just people who sin against you, although you do have that. Jesus said, “If you forgive anyone their sins, they are forgiven.”
Of course you can choose to bind people’s sins to them, not allowing them to escape the guilt and condemnation they are under. You have the authority to withhold forgiveness. “If you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”
I’m not sure why you would want to bind people’s sins to themselves when you can choose to release them. You’ve been forgiven so much. But that’s up to you.
I don’t know exactly how we will judge the world and judge angels the way Paul says we will. I know that the forgiveness that Jesus and Stephen extended from the cross was expressed in a prayer to God the Father. And our authority to forgive sins is the main result of receiving the Holy Spirit according to the gospel of John. I assume that our authority will be exercised in Union with God, “in Christ.”
One thing I know: I will strive to forgive sins, both in this life and in the life to come. Jesus’ death for our sins, the cancellation of the law, the example of God sending rain on the just and the unjust alike, and a host of other Scripture tell me that my main job relates to my willingness to forgive.
I don’t know how our judgment of the world and the angels will be expressed. I seriously doubt that God’s going to take a vote.
But I see nothing in Scripture that suggests that I should hold people’s sins against them. Jonah didn’t want the Ninevites forgiven, but God is pretty stubborn that way.
You wrote that, “God despises all sin equally.”
God promises to “throw away all our sins into the deepest sea” (Micah 7:19).
Let’s follow his example.
Whyte,
Jesus said, “… whosoever shall do and teach [the law; the least commandment], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Matt 5:19
Also Jesus said to His disciples, ” …whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not do it the same manner as they; for they say, and do not.” Matt. 23:3
Jesus said we can do nothing without Him. But when we are born again, He and the Father, through the Holy Spirit come and abide with us. Amazing truth!
He write the law on our hearts.
You are write that we are dead to the law written on stone, because it is written on our hearts, and we live by faith, not by works.
The law is good, holy, and spiritual. The true believer of Christ will love God’s law.
This is a deep subject for sure. It’s very important to know how to teach and show from God’s Word the relationship of the law and grace; and faith and works.
May the Lord grant us a holy fear within our hearts as we read, study, and discuss these things that are not easily understood. 2 Peter 3:16
Stonne - thanks for the reply. Keep in mind - the issue primarily in mind here is, ‘how do we determine what is right and wrong behavior?’
In reference to the law - you seem to be suggesting that it really has no reference or application to the Christian after salvation.
You said:
“So if you are filled with the Holy Spirit and being led by the Spirit, that’s enough. “You are not under law.” You don’t continue to measure yourself by the written code. If you attempt to measure yourself by your conformity to the written code, then you are into self-justification, not justification by faith.”
Keep in mind - the issue here is not justification by faith - but how do we know what is proper behavior for the believer? i.e. what is sin? What is right behavior?
When we come to the moral prescriptions for the NT believer - we find that they are rooted and based on the law.
Paul [Rom. 13:8ff] - ‘Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another, for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law, for this “you shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, steal, covet, [etc.] is summed up in the saying, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
When Paul wants to tell us how to live - he finds the moral basis for his exhortation in the OT law
This is also how Jesus used the law
He made it very clear He did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it [Matt. 5:17]
He summed up the law in two statements: ‘Love God, love man [Matt. 22:34ff]
He didn’t destroy the law. The moral precepts of God neither began with the Mosaic law nor ended with it. The command to love God and one’s neighbor are timeless principles and both Jesus and Paul state that they are merely expressions of that law.
How Jesus fulfilled the law is the key to how we are not under the law
He paid sin’s penalty for us. He bore the curse of the law. [Gal. 3:13]
What He fulfilled was the righteous demand of perfection required by the law - so that the believer does not need to live in fear of the law’s condemnation. He now obeys gladly - thru the empowerment of the Spirit. He rejoices that He is under no condemnation. He rejoices in the fact that His salvation is not based on his ability to perfectly measure up to that standard.
But - He still recognizes the standards of right behavior are rooted in that moral law.
When Peter tells us to be holy [I Peter 1:16] - how do we know what holiness looks like? What if I say that the Spirit is leading me to be a homosexual. Do I have any way of verifying that as a legitimate claim?
I can verify it by checking my behavior against the moral precepts of God found in His written word. His Word says it is sin and a violation of holiness - therefore it is not the Spirit that is leading me to that lifestyle but my own sinful flesh.
If it were just a matter of letting go and letting God - why all the exhortations of the NT to live morally? Why tell Christians to love their neighbor? Why not just tell them to follow the Spirit? Because we need to know what a Spirit-filled life of obedience will look like.
You said:
“Fruit grows naturally from a tree. A tree doesn’t have to struggle and study and work to grow fruit.”
Paul said:
I Tim. 4:7 - ‘Discipline yourself for the purpose of godliness’
Heb. 12:14 - ‘Pursue peace with all men and the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord.’
The life of faith is not a call to a life of sloth
It is a call to a battle, a struggle - we wage war not against flesh and blood, we beat our bodies into submission, we fall and we get back up.
Jerry Bridge’s little book, ‘The pursuit of Holiness’ is a good classic on the place of effort in the Christian life.
Grace is opposed to earning but not to effort
Grace leads to effort - it ‘instructs us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires’ [titus 2:11]
You replied to my question:
“You asked how we can know if a particular act is sin or not. That really is irrelevant now. You may “catch” one sinful act now, and miss the next four after lunch.”
I find that a very reckless way to live the Christian life. Should I be concerned if I feel a desire to commit adultery? Is it really irrelevant? I don’t think you would want to stand on that foundation.
You said:
“Love your neighbor and you’ve met the law’s demands.”
I would agree - that is because the command to love one’s neighbor is a restatement and summary of the law
Gotta go!
Grace and Peace
Whyte,
“Take heed to yourselves: If your brother trespass against you, confront him; and if he repents, forgive him.” Luke 17:3
Jesus [the risen Lord] said, “And that repentance and remission [forgiveness;pardon] of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, begining at Jerusalem.” Luke 24:47
I’m going to preach repentance and forgiveness of sins, as our Lord has commanded His Church. I love the commandments of our Lord, because He first loved me, and gave Himself for me.
Praise God. Excellent.
Each of us is accountable to God for rightly handling the word of truth. It’s to God to whom we are accountable, he is able to make us stand, and we will stand.
I wish for you the kind of clarity I would like for myself, the kind of uprightness I would like for myself, and the same degree of obedience I would like for myself.
Whyte:
In a previous post, you said:
“You are not under the law. There is no need to worry about whether this particular act is a sin or not. No need to worry. Walk in the Spirit. Love your neighbor and you’ve met the law’s demands. There is no law against love.”
Riddle me this: How can a person say “…and the same degree of obedience I would like for myself.” and at the same time claim that there is no need to be concerned about whether a particular act is sin or not? What exactly are you desiring to be obedient to? ….the law? But you already ruled out that option… So what is it?
Here’s an interesting experiment: how about I take your advice to just “walk in the spirit” and “love your neighbor” while completely disregarding the law. What would you say to me if I stole your car and burned down your house because I thought it was best for your future? I could claim that I was loving my neighbor because my motives were pure. How could you hold anything against me if that’s what I believed the Spirit was leading me to do?
The bottom line is this: if you truly to desire to be obedient and love your neighbor as you claim you do, then you will strive to keep God’s commandments, His moral law. We MUST be concerned as to whether this or that act is a sin because if it is, we have failed to love our neighbor and God.
So, when Brian McLauren’s buddy is overtly disregarding God’s law (and therefore hating God Himself), that’s a problem.
Dear Matt,
With regard to your question, “What exactly are you desiring to be obedient to?”
My desire is to obey the Holy Spirit when he leads me. “If you obey the Spirit, the Law of Moses has no control over you.” (Galatians 5:18)
Again, I want to obey the Holy Spirit when he leads me. “Those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.” (Romans 8:14)
Regarding your interesting experiment. You ask me, “How could you hold anything against me?”
Well, that’s the point of forgiveness. As regenerated Christians we live a new kind of life, a new life altogether. We don’t have the same attachment to our *things* that other people do.
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus discusses situations almost identical to the one you proposed:
“You have heard that it was said, “Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.”But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. . . . Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.” (Matthew 5:38-42)
Christians are supposed to have virtually no attachment to possessions or personal pride at all. This isn’t taught full strength in the congregations, however, which is one of the reasons Christians are virtually identical in lifestyle and morality as the world.
You ask, “How could you hold anything against me?” Here are three different versions of Paul’s words to some Corinthians who were defrauding one another (I Corinthians 6:7).
“Why do ye not rather take wrong? Why do you not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?”
“Why not just accept mistreatment and leave it at that? It would be far more honoring to God to let yourself be cheated.”
“Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated?”
How could I hold anything against you? Why would I want to? I owe God a debt I can never repay, why would I want to even up a score with you when I’ve been forgiven so much?
“If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”
Remember Jesus’ prayer on the cross? Without their even repenting, Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”
And when Stephen was being stoned for blasphemy, he prayed, “Father, do not hold this sin against them.”
Ideally I would be more concerned for your healing and restoration than for my material welfare. Ideally.
And what would I ask you? Probably, “Why did you do that?”
I would be curious.
You need to think through the following paragraph. It seems a little muddled to me.
“The bottom line is this: if you truly to desire to be obedient and love your neighbor as you claim you do, then you will strive to keep God’s commandments, His moral law. We MUST be concerned as to whether this or that act is a sin because if it is, we have failed to love our neighbor and God.”
Jesus’ commandment is to forgive you. If you want my car and to see my house burned, maybe I need to hand you the keys to my Moped and my wallet as well. That’s how Jesus described it. That’s how Paul described it. “Do not resist the evil man.”
My failure to forgive you would be a sin, according to Scripture.
For the rest of you, notice this: Matthew’s desire to preserve the so-called moral law is to use it as a tool to nail down the guilt of someone else, to use it as a means of binding their sin to them in unforgiveness. It is sad to me that we seem to want to use the law to prove how bad other people are. “I have the proof. Here it is in black-and-white. You are an evil person. Now I have you!”
Whyte:
Interesting response, but you are still being self-contradictory.
Basically, you said that you would forgive me in the hypothetical situation I gave, but why would you have to do that? How can you be sure that my stealing your car was sinful? On what basis to you call those actions “evil”?
I’ll ignore your ridicule at the end where you tried to infer that my believing in the moral law is for the purpose of elevating myself above others. On the contrary, the moral law proves that we are evil before God Himself!
Ya’ got me, Matt.
Brothers,
Seems to me that I remember Scripture that warns us about wrangling with men who don’t want to obey the Word ( the Scriptures, which is the whole of God’s law, indeed all that He has said). Mr. Stonne’s remarks indicate that he has no intention of defining sin according to the Word, but instead according to the unfettered leadership of the Spirit, but the question is fair to ask Stonne: what spirit? If the “leadership” that this “spirit” brings is not in direct accordance to the full Word of God ( including Romans 1), then this spirit that leads Mr. Stonne is indeed NOT the Holy Spirit, but some other spirit. This is why we need the Scriptures. To have an anchor to test by. This anchor we must have.
A man who will not obey the clear teaching of Scripture, because of redeeming Grace at Calvary, not to earn it, had better think twice about whether he has the redeeming grace spoken of by Christ in John’s Gospel and elsewhere. McLaren, at this point is proving to be such a man. As to Mr. Stonne, I do not know, as I do not know him. But the Word is the rule, not the Spirit apart from the Word. THE SPIRIT never works apart from the Word.
Bottom line: McLaren has no intention of truly living by the divine limits of Scripture. He has another
“truth” that is emerging in his own mind. Romans 1 and other passages are clear - not that we are not all sinners, but Christ’s grace causes, once redeemed, to see sin, in all its’ forms for what it is. Sin. To refuse to admit it, as does McLaren, makes him at minimum a false teacher, maybe worse still?
The Word is the revealed message of Christ. A man who calls himself a teacher and yet who refuses to submit to this Word must be refuted and rejected entirely, unless this man repents truly. For this we must hope for from McLaren. This is also a warning for consideration to Mr. Stonne.
Gary Fore
Gary, in the past week or two I have quoted numerous times II Timothy 3:16: “All Scripture is inspired by God and has utility for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.”
I’m not sure how you think I have misinterpreted the Scripture. I believe what I cited from Galatians 5 and Romans 8 are valid in considering Christian obedience. Other people may not highlight them the way I have, and that’s fine. But they seem important to me in terms of “keeping in step with the Spirit.”
When Matt asked me, “How could you hold anything against me”? — I replied that God called on me to forgive him, and I based that on what Jesus said, that is, what is written in the Scriptures.
So when you write, “Stonne’s remarks indicate that he has no intention of defining sin according to the Word, but instead according to the unfettered leadership of the Spirit,” I confess I don’t see myself in your characterization.
“This is why we need the Scriptures. To have an anchor to test by. This anchor we must have.”
I agree with you. As far as I am able, I have reasoned from Scripture in all of my posts.
I’ve been criticized as someone who only wants stir things up. It is my sincere desire to be a constructive, edifying and Biblical participant in the conversation in these threads.
* * * * * * * *
So far no one has interacted with the following four statements of Paul, which are a significant thread running through Romans.
1) The “because Law brings wrath.” (Romans 4:15a)
2) “Where there is no law there is no transgression.” (Romans 4:15b)
3) “But sin is not taken into account when there is no law.” (Romans 5:13b)
4) “For apart from the law, sin is dead.” (Romans 7:8b)
These four statements are NOT based on an argument. These four statements are the BASIS for his argument, they are Paul’s presupposition, not his conclusion.
In Colossians Paul writes: “He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, naiing it to the cross.” (2:13-14)
1) God canceled the written code, by means of which cancellation he forgave our sins. (vv 13-14)
2) the written code and its regulations were against us and stood opposed to us. The Torah was our enemy. (v 14)
3) God took away the written code. God nailed the written code to the cross.
These citations are in agreement with Galatians and Romans as a whole that adherance to the first five books of the Bible, the Torah, is no longer necessary.
This seems clear to me.
Equally clear:
1) “All who rely on observing the law are under a curse.” (Galatians 3:18)
2) “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law.” (Galatians 3:13a)
3) “Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.” (Galatians 3:25)
4) “But if you are led by the Spirit, you ae not under law.” (Galatians 5:16)
I am not antinomian. There is a law I believe whose authority I gladly accept.
5) “The ENTIRE law is summed up in a single command: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
Gary, I have accounted for the cancellation of the law as taught by Paul, which cancellation forms the foundation of the central command of the New Covenant, taught by both the Messiah and by Paul, to love one another.
To affirm the cancellation of the law and the primacy of the law of love is not wrangling over words.
To answer all of your post point by point is probably not necessary. I would simply add that I have not denied the truth of Romans 1 to 2:6.
Paul says to the Christians in Rome, based on Romans 1: “Because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed.”
“You show contempt for the riches of his kindness and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness leads you to repentence.”
Gary, you have it within your authority to forgive people of their sins. Why would you withhold that forgiveness?
Jesus prayed from the cross and Stephen prayed during his stoning, that the Father not hold these people’s sins against them, that he forgive them. They hadn’t repented yet. I am confident that Jesus’ prayer was in accordance with the Father’s will. I assume Stephen’s was.
God cancelled the written code in his kindness, thereby no longer taking sin into account because of his kindness, no longer judging you by it because to his kindness, removing wrath and transgression because of his kindness.
“If you forgive anyone his sins, they shall be forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.” (John 20:21)
Christ shares his authority, his exousia, with you.
This is Scriptural clarity on the law, love, and forgiveness.
It seems so simple to me. So clear. So Christ-like.
I don’t know why it sounds like wrangling.
The authors view: Sodomy is a sin. End of discussion.
EC further questions that need to be considered:
- Have we let homosexuality become a “worse sin” because it is such an infected issue, thereby loosing the aspect of Gods grace for sinners?
- Are we treating homosexuals differently than other sinners? Are we ready to let homosexuals live, thrive and garher strength in the body of christ in order to be able to conquer their sin?
- Is it homosexual orientation or behavoiur that is sinful? Can we ever judge anyone for a potential for sinning? Then how come I can be in the church? As long as there is a trace of a possibilty that homosexuality is genetical/socially formed early in childhood rather than a chosen behaviour - shouldn´t the christian approach be to give them the benefit of doubt?
- Can christian homosexuals who have decided to live in sexual abstinence be members in the church? Leaders?
- How do we form a fellowship that is more family and less theatre, in order for abstaining homosexuals (and for that part, heterosexual singles) to have real, intimate relationships?
- How come the burgois family (mum, daddy, children) has become the norm? When our founder (Jesus) and foremost teacher (Paul) both where singles and asked us to consider celibacy for the sake of the kingdom?
-What if homosexual people could live together in pairs, abstaining from sex, but still being each others partners - maybe making vows, in what way would that be sinful?
Honestly, do you think that the proposition “Sodomy is sin” is enough of an answer?
Propositions are dangerous in that they are highly addictive and having reached truth, we believe that all has been said on the subject that can be said.
“Sodomy is sin” is a faithful reading of the Bible and the right answer (and enough of an answer) in a christendom context where christian ethics have been reduced to personal morality - the modern america up to about 1970. But it is not enough at this time in history! AND IT ISN´T THE WHOLE TRUTH AND THE ONLY THING THE BIBLE SAYS ON THE SUBJECT!
In a postchristendom reality, personal morality is not enough. Richard Hayes (in “The moral vision of the new testament”) postulates that Pauls ethics are based on four focal points; community, cross and new creation - it is informed by the community, and is collective in nature, not individualistic. It is based on the cross, containing both grace and a recognition of the hardships we can expect to encounter as disciples, and it is eschatological in that it is often informed by and motiveted with the future glory.
In the same way we need at this time in history to rethink the church as a missional community in a pagan world. This does not mean accomodation, but it means we need to be brave enough to question our propositions.
This specific question, then, changes from “Is homosexuality wrong?” to “How can we be church in a way, faithful to scripture, aware of our own shortcomings and need of salvation, that paints Jesus in such a vivid way that we are approachable for homosexuals? And then, how can we be a fellowship that not only demands celibacy, but also offers enough imtimacy to make it a possibilty worth considering?
Valuable questions, Pastor Astor. I hope these questions about effective church ministry to gays and lesbians will bear good fruit.
I see some problems which would interfere with knowing how to discuss your questions with you.
First, in order to delve into these questions, a person would have had to have some actual relationships with gay and lesbian Christians.
Second, in order to have these actual relationships, a person would have to overcome their visceral reactions of revulsion and disgust (if they had them).
Third, the members of a congregation exist on a continuum regarding their feelings and understanding about gays and lesbians.
All the good efforts of a person or a pastor to create the kind of accepting and intimate fellowship you describe could easily be undone by one thoughtless person making hateful, ignorant and rejecting comments.
There’s an ex-homosexual in my church. He now serves the Lord, and tries to reach other homosexuals with the truth of their sinfulness, and share with them the gospel.
Pastor Astor,
Could we insert any type of sinful behavior instead of homosexual in all these questions?
Or am I missing your point?
Thank you for your mild and thoughtful replies!
You are right Whyte Stonne about your points. This obviously would be a situation where “sodomy is sin” would not be enough of an answer. Instead our own sin comes into focus.
I heard of the christian reformed church in north america that adapted the “hate the sin,love the sinner” thinking regarding homosexuality. When they evaluated this, they found they had hid behind it not to have to deal with the real people. They installed a confessory prayer in their service regarding this:
Lord, our gracious God,
We have sinned against you.
We have not done the things we ought to have done.
We have not kept the promises we made.
Instead of trying to become a place where persons who love you
and are homosexual could find a gracious dwelling,
We confess that we have continued to build walls.
We have avoided them.
We have been cruel.
We have called names and used insulting language.
We have wished that they would just go away.
Truly, Lord, there is little health in us.
We have wronged these children of yours,
these brothers and sisters of ours,
And we repent of our sins.
We are sorry for what we have done
and for what we have left undone.
Lord, forgive us our sins through the blood of Jesus.
Dear heavenly Father, we love you.
We love you for keeping your promises,
And we want to be like you.
We want to keep our promises.
Help us, Father, to do so.
Help us to love our gay and lesbian sisters and brothers.
Help us love with words and deeds.
Strengthen our resolve to listen to their stories,
to share their pain,
to learn from others,
to walk together on life’s journey.
Lord, we have questions.
We do not know everything.
Give us the grace not to act otherwise.
Give us the humility to attend to what we do know.
We do know that life is more complicated than we wish.
We do know that we need your forgiveness for the past
And your grace for the future
As we continually struggle to be the church,
Faithful to your Word,
Faithful to each other.
In Christ. Amen.
I think that would really change a church.
Don, I believe this would be true regarding any sinful bahaviour, but just as you wouldn´t demand from a person to be ex-proud or ex-selfish in order to join the church, I don’t think we can demand that from homosexuals. The sexual orientation is so deeply related to identity, and homosexuality is such a hot potato in evangelical circles, that I believe it could use some special attention.
Pastor Astor, you wrote, “Have we let homosexuality become a “worse sin” because it is such an infected issue, thereby loosing the aspect of Gods grace for sinners?”
If the homosexuality is “an infected issue,” then what do you think the discussion is infected with? What is the nature of the infection?
And how does this infection short-circuit grace in our encounters with Christian gays and lesbians?
I believe, in part at least, that our unwillingness to admit that our countries are not christian, but people in them are, and thus wanting to force our ethics on people through legislation have made us feel attacked by non believers. That, in turn has made us hit back.
Why would we care if non christian homosexuals have sex? Why would we oppose them having steady commited relationships? The abstinance from the sin of homosexual practice wont get them to heaven, only a relationship with Christ will.
Had we focused instead on being a body of believers acting out the love of God in this world, I believe our situation would look much different. We would be a place for everyone, including homosexuals, to encounter God.
People seek God. Many die in despair, not having found him. When they come to us, we slap them over the face with our ethics.
“You are wrong” is so easy to say - it demands nothing of us.
“You are loved” is much harder, since we are called to present and represent that love.
If I am understanding you correctly, the issue of homosexuality has been infected by the the desire of some Christians to deal with the “problem” of sexual orientation legislatively.
That is, some Christian leaders want to wield the power of the state against a certain segment of the population.
Two more questions. You asked, “How do we form a fellowship that is more family and less theatre, in order for abstaining homosexuals (and for that part, heterosexual singles) to have real, intimate relationships?”
Do you think the formation of a supportive, intimate, relationship-friendly “family” is more likely to be successful in an already established church or in a “start-up” situation?
Assuming the “start-up” church setting is easier, do you have any advice for people and clerics in long-established churches?
I believe it might be easier in a start up situation, but that does not mean in would be impossible in other situations. Lets think of it as a problem of people beeing isolated and alone; celibate homosexuals, longtime singles, widows and widowers. Primarily it is about seeing it as a problem, not about family but about church, noone should be alone in the household of God, and then take it from there.
Church history is full of different examples of communal living that could serve as inspiration for different kinds of people:
The extended family - get your children a new “uncle” or “aunt” - someone who doesn´t live in your house, but drops by whenever and always turns up for holidays etc.
The extended household - get a live in, why not a new grand parent?
The praying orders - buy a house and invite church widows (and other female singles) to move in and dedicate themselves to a life in intercession for the church, the city, the world. Treat them with the respect their ministry is worth.
The social orders - the same thing, but theese ones will be the backbone of your social ministry instead.
Why not plant a brotherhood of believers in the worst part of town? Or even as a missionary enterprice somewhere in the world?
The working orders - you get the idea, theese people have regular jobs, but live together, cook together and share life - they fill the need of partnership for one another.
The temple widows - how about having some elderly women live in the church to serve in practical and spiritual ways? Cleaning, running a food bank/soup kitchen, praying morning, noon and evening, welcoming visitors, easier cases of counselling.
Think of singles as a tremendous resource for the kingdom! Paul says they are not so burdened with the interests of this world (my parafrase), they have time, they are mobile, they can act on short notice, they have no one to be resposible to other than God, they can take risks a parent couldn´t.
So Pastor Astor, you’re believe Christians need to make *major* lifestyle changes. Lifestyle considerations shouldn’t be restricted to smoking, alcohol, movies and the like. Lifestyle changes can include decisions about who you live with–expanding the nuclear family to include those outside the family circle.
My wife and I have had people live with us on and off our whole lives. Not with the intentional, missional goals you have described, but simply helping our homeless friends.
You ask, “How can we be a fellowship that not only demands celibacy, but also offers enough intimacy to make it a possibilty worth considering?”
Your post above suggests numerous ways to enhance the intimacy of our Christian relationships. You describe radical lifestyle changes, as well as modest changes.
What do you see as some of the major barriers to intimacy among Christians?
I really appreciate this conversation! Sadly, I will be gone for a couple of days, and will not be able to answer this before monday. I am going to a youth volunteers gathering to teach. So, until then, i wish you a blessed weekend.
I’m sorry I didn’t get back here as soon as I said I would. The trip took a lot more energy than I expected. I am currently trying to get back to work after a lenghty illness, and can’t always foresee how much energy something will take.
Thank you so much for your insightful comments and questions, by the way! You really are an excellent conversation partner!
It´s good to hear that you have practiced hospitality for a long time. That makes it so much easier - that way you will not have to question your own motives for beeing hospitalble, even if it would be done intentionally.
I believe one major barrier to intimacy is that intimacy is not made part of the deal of how we do church - demanding intimacy would be breaking the rules we have set up. The way we do church is a example of this - I have as much interaction with others in a normal service as I have with the people in the bus on my way to work - I look at others necks, and have mine viewed by others. We sit pretty close to each other for an hour because we are travelling in the same direction, but thats it.
True intimacy requires vulnerability and dependancy on others, and we are not comfortable with that. We have reached an economic standard that allows us to be independant, and I believe we have yet to realize that independance is also lonliness.
Intimacy also requires proximaty - we need to be close to one another. Living nearby - reinventing the nieighbourhood, maybe? Perhaps question the whole “bigger is better” mentality - how many people can you be intimate with?
Well, you said Monday, and it’s only Wednesday. No problem.
In terms of hospitality, I think Matthew 6:3 applies. “Do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing.” I’ve always taken this to mean that your “good deeds” should be unknown even to yourself. Not just a matter of humility, but being so led by the Spirit and by the Imago Dei that you are just doing what comes “naturally.”
The servants in Luke 17:10 say, “We are unworthy servants; we have only done our duty.”
Yet again in the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. The sheep are totally surprised by their reception into heaven. They weren’t expecting to get into heaven. They didn’t know that what they had done, they had done to Christ himself. They were unconscious of their good deeds.
Regarding intimacy and church structure: For sure, Christian church sanctuaries are designed the same as everyone else’s non-Christian buildings are.
As far as I know, whenever a special building exists for ANY religious group (orthodox Christian, heretical, apostate, secular, or non-Christian), there is the equivalent of a pulpit, usually on a platform, and rows of seats.
The layout of pulpit and pews is, essentially, worldly. Everyone uses the design and layout for the same purposes. There is literally nothing sacred about the pulpit and pew arrangement. Christendom will never abandon that design.
The transmission of information and propaganda by a certified, credentialed spokesperson is at the core of how the buildings are organized. INFORMATION transmission, and CONTROL, are the chief concerns in the tradition of sanctuary design.
Here is the BIBLICAL priority for our gatherings.
“Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another…” (Hebrews 10:25a).
Why do we meet? To encourage ONE ANOTHER. We do not meet in order for one or two people (plus a praise band or choir) to encourage us. We are to encourage one another. Maximum partipation. (see I Corinthians 10:26-33 and Colossians 3:16)
In ancient archaeology, the first specially built “church building” didn’t appear until, I believe, the 300’s.
Thus, Christian church buildings appeared about the time the church started wresting control of temple buildings from the pagan Roman priesthoods.
And of course you know where the early Christian groups met–for the most part.
Hope you recover well, Pastor Astor–from your weekend AND your illness!
It seems that the first church building was built in the early third century, and the building craze really took off about 100 years later, after 321.
I totally agree!
A lot of the problem is the love of subcultures, which is usually hand in hand with musical styles, etc. We’ve tried to “baptize” or “Christianize” every subculture under the sun in the name of tolerance and “love,” when really it’s just the fact that people love the world and don’t want to leave it. Since when is it a foreign concept that your life should change if you die to the world to live in Christ? Many of these subcultures(punk, goth, etc) have inherently unchristian mindsets tied to them, and as we refuse to address them for fear of being seen as close minded or intolerant, those subcultures and their attached mindsets enter the church and bring with it what we have today… a whole lot of good feelings with very little scripture.