You’ve been interacting with me over on my blog, and at my most recent post: The Concept of “Fundamental doctrines”: Modern Reductionism or Historic Protestant Doctrine? (which links back to this series). In skimming through your posts here, let me share a link which will help you and others reading this in thinking through how to approach new doctrinal issues which arise in our day.

Wayne Grudem wrote an excellent chapter for the book: Beyond the Bounds: Open Theism and the Undermining of Biblical Christianity (ed. by John Piper, Justin Taylor, and Paul Helseth [Wheaton: Crossway, 2003]). The chapter is entitled: “Why, When, and For What, Should We Draw New Boundaries?” It is available in PDF and DOC formats. This chapter iw well worth your time, as he explains how to confront issues like egalitarianism, homosexuality, and the like. He discusses the importance and validity of boundaries and how with some organizations, boundaries are necessarily to be drawn tighter than just the level of fundamental or essential doctrine.Hope that helps.

Blessings in Christ,

Bob Hayton

I believe the issue is not whether it will damage or how much it will damage the body of Christ or our witness if we contend for the faith, but will we be obedient to contend for the faith. God superintends our obedience to achieve His desired results.

First, in Leviticus we have instructions on how to deal with sin in the camp with the upshot being that since they were a people set apart by God, they were to be a people set apart unto God, and, as such, were to be holy unto the Lord. So sin was dealt with specifically and directly so that it would not spread and infect the whole camp. They were to deal quickly and decisively with it to keep it from spreading. Paul espoused this principle to the Corinthians in I Corinthians 5:6 when he said, “A little leaven leavens the entire lump.” And he repeated this to the Galatians also. Unopposed, unconfronted, and therefore unchecked sin will run rampant in the body; and sin weakens and destroys our witness as it removes our distinctiveness from the world around us.

Secondly, God has called us to be distinctively different from the world around us. The world tolerates, promotes, sanctions, and advertises its sin, even to the point of flaunting its sin. We are told in II Corinthians 5:17 to “Come out from their midst and be separate.” In I Peter 1:16 we are told “You shall be holy for I am holy.” Peter goes on in 2:4-9 to describe us as a holy priesthood, a holy nation, and a people for God’s own possession so that we may proclaim His excellencies. As His people we can not proclaim His excellencies when we are allowing sin to go unchecked in the camp so that the camp looks and acts like the world. When that happens we have lost our saltiness and are good only for the dung heap.

So we should speak the truth and speak it in love, but not shrink back from declaring the truth. We really have no other option. God’s holiness should be important to us. It is important to Him as He requires us to treat Him as such. As we are the Lord’s body on earth, His visible manifestation of Himself to the world, then we should represent Him faithfully and accurately.

Morris

Thank you for your gracious responses. Morris, thank you in particular for responding about what we should do with the Christian enablers and the condoners of sin.

For whatever reason, it doesn’t bother me as much when the World or the Culture declares that same-sex behavior isn’t a sin. I guess it’s because I automatically expect the World to be in direct opposition to God and His Word. But when “Christian” pastors, theologians, authors, and lay people declare that same-sex behavior isn’t a sin, and that there should be GLBT marriage, then I get very concerned and troubled.

Here are some doctrines that others argue are not essential to salvation: Inerrancy (and Authority) of Scripture, Egalitarianism, Same-Sex behavioral permissiveness, Neo-Darwinian Macro-Evolution.

Let’s just focus on same-sex sin within liberal mainline churches, within some/many Emergent churches, and within perhaps some conservative evangelical churches. Because this same-sex issue seems to be related in some fashion to Inerrancy and Authority of Scripture, “Equal Rights” egalitarianism, and Macro-Evolution.

I know folks who staunchly assert that there will be actively gay Christians in heaven. Both gay Christians themselves and heterosexual mainline ministry leaders assert this. “Essential” doctrine?

I think so. I’m just unsure about what to do with the enablers and teachers of heresy and apostasy. These people just seem to shriek even louder when you assert that their doctrine is not biblical.

With regards to my “Is it worth it?” question, I should have nuanced it more clearly. There is a personal cost to pay, which is our cross to bear. I believe it’s worth it although we oftentimes need to pray for more courage. But what I’m really driving at in my question is whether it’s worth it to the potential or actual damage it does to the body of Christ and to our Gospel Witness when we contend so diligently against false teachers and enablers of sin?

Many people claim that the drive for purity and holiness within the Church is, ironically, impure and unholy! I think this is a specious claim, but I have to recognize that it is used, and that it is often used to great effect in stifling and suppressing the transforming power that comes from obeying God’s Word.

I’ll stop now. I might be rambling too much.

Pax.

To answer your question, yes, I would extend my answer to those whom you have labeled theologically liberal enablers of the same sex behavior. Just because you call yourself a Christian and go to, or belong to, a church does not make you a Christian no more than you or I putting on a football uniform and sitting on the Dallas Cowboys’ bench makes us a football player.

In essence you are what you believe, and to believe something that is the exact opposite of Scripture, to deny what the Scripture says about a form of sin, is to deny God Himself and to call Him a liar. And let’s be clear, the Scripture is clear about the same sex issue, it is clear about sexual immorality, and it is just as clear about liars not entering the kingdom of God. In Mark 1:15, at the start of His public ministry Christ declared, “Repent, and believe the gospel.” The Scripture is the gospel from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21.

Jude calls us to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. He was writing to refute those within the church, not outside the church, who were spreading false doctrine. The enablers you described are guilty of spreading false doctrine in the church, even if they are not in a teaching or preaching role.

Additionally, in Matthew 13, Jesus gives us the parable of the wheat and the tares, and from this parable we see that there will be counterfeit Christians planted in the church by the evil one. In II Corinthians 11:15 we see that the servants of the Devil disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. As Jesus said, “You will know them by their fruit.” Part of that fruit will be the doctrine they hold to and espouse.

When we are contending for the faith we should expect to be attacked by those within the church who are the tares and the servants of unrighteousness. They will call us harsh, judgmental, unloving, critical, divisive, mean-spirited, Pharisees, polemic, to name a few. And to answer your final question, yes, it is worth it, for there is really only One to please. I’ll close with Galatians 1:10 For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a slave of Christ.

Morris

I believe the Bible does present the same sex issue as an issue of salvation. I Corinthians 6:9-11 “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, not idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor durnkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 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.” … It is pretty clear, actually crystal clear, from these Scriptures that the same sex issue is one that directly relates to salvation…whether one is actually saved or not.

Thanks for the response Morris. I’d like to extend both your comment and my original lengthy comment to a very important observation. There are two categories of folks that we are contending for and contending with. One category are the unrepentant homosexual “Christians”, egalitarian Christians, and Christians who hold that the Bible is errant. For discussion sake, let’s just focus on homosexual Christians who believe that same-sex behavior is NOT a sin. That’s the first category.

The second category are those Christians who are not homosexuals and who believe that same-sex behavior is not a sin, or if they think it’s a sin, they get upset with those Christians who say that it’s a sin. This second category of Christians are what I call “ENABLERS”. Because they enable same-sex sin by providing an environment for it to flourish and thrive.

For example, there are liberal mainline Protestant churches and leaders, and there are Emergent churches and their leaders, who are Christians and who enable same-sex behavior within their churches, and even ordaining unrepentant gays and lesbians to ministry positions such as a pastor or reverend or minister. And in the case of The Episcopalian Church, to the office of Bishop.

So Morris, I understand your biblical argument towards same-sex “Christians” not inheriting the Kingdom of God. But would you also extend your biblical argument towards the theologically liberal enablers of same-sex behavior? What would your analysis say about a Christian leader or pewsitter who doesn’t engage in same-sex behavior but who says that it’s okay for GLBT Christians to do that contra Scripture’s clear prohibitions, and even ordaining them to ministry positions?

Are the enablers at risk of not spending eternity with God too? Or can false teachers still spend eternity with God? After all, there are many who would argue that the doctrine of no-same-sex behavior is a non-salvific doctrine. And as such, there is room for a “charitable” diversity of theological positions on the subject.

What say thee to the enablers? Of whom there are many. And when you engage them in polemic discussion, they will call you argumentative, a quarreler, a legalist, a harsh judgmental Pharisee, etc….

Non-Christians, not knowing any better, will simply see Christians arguing amongst each other about theological matters, and they will think that all Christians do is fight with each other, and they don’t love each other as Jesus said we should, and they will think that Christians are hypocrites, and in the end, damage is done to the Gospel witness and to the Body of Christ.

You tell me how a faithful follower of Christ like John MacArthur can contend against Christian enablers of sin without being misrepresented and distorted and slandered. And the corollary: Is it worth it to be misrepresented and distorted and slandered and for the gospel witness to suffer and the Body of Christ to suffer in some way when a loyal servant of Christ stands on God’s Word and clearly, yet lovingly, denounces unholy sin?

God made man in three parts: body, soul and spirit. When Adam sinned, he died spiritually and passed that nature on to future generations. When we are born again, the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in us, giving us spiritual life, again. When we die, our body dies, not our soul. We are the soul that lives in the body. It is the soul that lives forever, whether in heaven or hell. When our body dies, our soul departs the body and the body decays back to dust. So, when Jesus died on the cross, it was just his body that died. He told the thief on the cross that “today, you will be with me in paradise”. Their souls went to paradise.