by Smitty
I guess the relentless, nihilistic spiritual decay of Progress can’t help but project itself upon churches:
. . .the changing allegiances and divides in evangelical churches and communities over homosexuality. In public, so many churches and pastors are afraid to talk about the generational and societal shifts happening. But behind the scenes, it’s a whole different game. Support for gay marriage across all age groups of white evangelicals has increased by double digits over the past decade, according to the Public Religion Research Institute, and the fastest change can be found among younger evangelicals—their support for gay marriage jumped from 20% in 2003 to 42% in 2014.
This winter, EastLake Community Church outside Seattle is quietly coming out as one of the first evangelical megachurches in the country to support full inclusion and affirmation of LGBTQ people. It is almost impossible to overstate the significance of this move. EastLake is in many ways the quintessential evangelical megachurch–thousands-strong attendance, rock-music worship, Bible-preaching sermons. But pastor Ryan Meeks, 36, is on the front wave of a new choice. “I refuse to go to a church where my friends who are gay are excluded from Communion or a marriage covenant or the beauty of Christian community,” Meeks tells me. “It is a move of integrity for me—the message of Jesus was a message of wide inclusivity.”
Ryan Meeks is encouraged to re-read the Bible in general and the Roman and Corinthian Epistles in particular. The Bible is our compass; Christ is our course. Yes, we get off course from time to time, but the only one smiling when somebody in a leadership position declares a false course to be the new true is Satan. Sure, technology has afforded some brand new ways to get off course. Yes, all manner of folk have been in the doors of my church. Indeed, we’re not going all Jonathan Edwards on them Sunday for Sunday.
But Elizabeth Dias is welcome to swing on by any traditional Baptist church to discover (a) the unalloyed Gospel still being preached, and (b) Christians rejecting the sort of rot she’s peddling.
Who knows? A little repentance may find her, too, as it has me.
via Hot Air headlines
. . . offering communion to unrepentant habitual sinners is just wrong.
I understand your sentiment and generally agree, but would alter your statement just slightly. Offering Communion to those who openly refuse to acknowledge their behavior as Sin and who seek to gain acceptance, and indeed celebration for that behavior within the Body of Christ is wrong.
Taking communion requires an examination of one’s heart and a confession of one’s Sins as those sins are defined by God’s word. A refusal or unwillingness to do that is a significant problem for the individual involved. If it is done openly and in defiance of God’s Word, it is a problem for the congregation and its leadership.
God invented marriage, not man. God designated marriage, not as a contractual agreement, but as a covenant. Governments may be able to regulate contracts, but a covenant is based on the laws of God and not man. Thus marriage is an institution outside of the bounds of government.
Government was happy to intrude into the marriage because when we gave tax exemptions based on marital status, or when we taxed a person’s estate upon their death, or when the State stepped in to direct the disposition of an estate, or when we used the State to enforce marital fidelity or grant divorces, we had to allow the State to define who was “married” and who was not.
As with all things Statist, the secular State’s definition of marriage and divorce has come to have more weight in society than God’s definition.
God defines marriage as being between men and women. While many men whom God called righteous in the Bible practiced polygamy, Jesus is quoted in Matthew chapter 19 that from the beginning of humanity, it was God’s intent that marriage would only be one man and one woman. In Mark chapter 10, Jesus stated that God, not man, joins the husband and wife and the two are “one flesh”, an act that by its very nature can only be heterosexual.
God defines sexual relations between people of the same sex as against His law, that is immoral. In Revelation 22:15, a book dictated to John by Jesus, God tells us that anyone who practices sexual immorality will not be granted eternal life.
These are ecclesiastical considerations that are outside of secular government, that is unless we want government to police sexual behavior between consenting adults based on the standards of the Bible, assuming we can agree what those are. Do we want Congress to have that debate?
A study of 1John seems to indicate that, for a specific sin, if you’re not repenting of that sin, and seeing it diminish over time, there may be an issue.
Say, wrath. If I’m not mellowing with age, and still have the personality of a dented wastebasket many years on, am I really walking in the light?
“From what I’ve read” is worth attention. Not all published accounts are fair and balanced.
It is the word “inclusivity” which causes the problem. Christianity is inclusive in that a) all have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory, but b) Grace is available to all who ask and repent.
That is not what Meeks means by “inclusive.” He means acceptance of everything without regard to the Truth of God’s Word. Such a philosophy dilutes the Gospel to meaninglessness. It allows Man to redefine Sin upon a majority vote. It seeks to elevate Man to equality with God relative to determining the fate of our Souls. Nowhere in the Bible is such a shift supported.
“personality of a dented wastebasket…”
I can visualize that. I love it.
That dude was hilarious.
I am not particularly happy with how the gay marriage movement has developed, nor do I have much respect for those denominations that have been quick to adopt the new moral principles that were just discovered last Tuesday. However, I have never quite understood the emphasis on the sin of sodomy, concerning which Christ has not one word to say. It is condemned in Leviticus as “tovah”, an abomination. But so is wearing clothing of mixed fibers, though I have never heard of the danger of damnation from wearing a cotton-polyester blend shirt. Without going into tedious detail, the anti-sodomitical passages in the Bible are not so straightforward as they may seem. E.g. the sin of Sodom may have in fact been inhospitality, which seems to be the mental association Christ makes in His only reference Sodom (Matthew. X: 14-15). On the other hand, Christ makes an explicit statement banning divorce in two places, Luke XVI:18 and Mark X:2-12. How is it that those who divorce, let alone divorce and remarry, always seem to be welcome and do not present a problem as habitual and unrepentant sinners? If you are going to be tough about one thing, how about being consistent. Sin is sin, even if the market for “spiritual product” won’t buy.
I’m guessing it’s not the Treasure Coast…
The biggest danger of “megachurches,” beyond the dilution of the gospel, is the dilution of what I call “presence.” That is, an individual easily gets lost in the numbers and can hide, and so avoid the service which is so necessary to spiritual growth.
You’re being silly. You have some knowledge of scripture, but know nothing of the context. Warning of judgement in the case of willful rebellion against God is not judgement.
Your skepticism is well placed. “Smiley” is actually a heretic and is little more than a motivational speaker.
I thought about composing a muslim like post for this, but restrained myself.
A former Pastor used to belong to the same denomination Scott once headed. A lot of people left when he was elected as head, including my former Pastor, who left to join the Assemblies of God. I think that denomination collapsed shortly afterward, iirc. Scott was regarded as something of weirdo because of his comportment. The samples I’ve seen demonstrated a less than Christian spirit about the man.
In Christianity, scripture determines orthodoxy, not people’s opinions. Once can point to, say, the Arminian/Calvinist divide as an example that proves the rule, but the problems of each side are well known and most realize those problems and don’t get too doctrinaire about it( with some very serious Calvinist exceptions like MacArthur, Sproul and Piper, who are simply arrogant idiots).
I intentionally pass over Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy because both have lost their way over the centuries.
There are two exceptions on divorce, one by Christ, the other by Paul. Christ allowed it for “porneia.” This is unrepentant sexual immorality (this is not just screwing around either. One partner refusing sex to the other is engaging in this sin, see 1 Cor 7). It is the only ground upon which a Christian may initiate divorce. It simply acknowledges in legal terms the sundering of the covenant by the sin.
The other ground was abandonment of a believer by a nonbeliever not content to live with a believer. This was happening in Corinth after one member of the couple converted and the other did not.
His widow is now the pastor: pastormelissascott.com
Central Florida – the Space Coast.
Your reply makes no sense. If you read the Scriptures I posted, you would see that judging others is not a matter of “justifying our sins”. Unrighteous judgment would be sinful, but calling out a supposed man of God for heresy is not unrighteous; indeed, it’s required. As well, rebuking you for wrongly interpreting Scripture and therefore misleading others by teaching them that all judgment is sinful is also appropriate.
If you feel that I have justified sin by righteously judging others, you need to state what sin I have allegedly committed, so that, if accurate, I might repent.
A sane (relatively speaking) part of Florida.
IIRC, there were converts who felt that they *must* leave their unconverted long-time partner and the gist of the thing was saying that divorce was optional but if the non-convert could stand to stay with the Christian, that the Christian should stay.
For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. John 3 17
If God didnt send Jesus to condemn the world what makes you think he tapped you for the job?
Only through Christ do you find everlasting life.
Agree wholeheartedly. What I have read though, are transcripts of sermons, and even the few I’ve read have caused words like “blasphemy” and “apostasy” to come to mind. As well, Osteen’s wife is “co-pastor”. I don’t see how a woman teaching the flock from the pulpit is at all Biblically acceptable.
This example, as well as the one you blogged about, are the very things that gives megachurches a bad rep.
This is actually a good point. If a heterosexual couple are “living together” it would be wrong to bar the church doors, but it would also be very wrong to allow them to hold office or teach Sunday school or bible studies. And, bottom line, heterosexual sexual sins are a much bigger deal if only because most people are heterosexual. Churches can do really odd destructive things when they try to be strict on this, though, particularly when they refuse to understand that one person can divorce another against that person’s will, and the church then locking the abandoned person into a solitary life is really not supported through scripture.
I refuse to go to a church where my friends who are gay are excluded from Communion or a marriage covenant or the beauty of Christian community,” Meeks tells me. “It is a move of integrity for me—the message of Jesus was a message of wide inclusivity.”
Had he not thrown in the bit about marriage, I would entirely agree. Homosexuality is a sin, and church is EXACTLY where we sinners need to be. Yes, it’s uncomfortable to be told that one’s acts are an offense to God, but where does improving one’s life start except from knowing that he has a problem?
As for marriage… As a matter of law, I am OK with gay marriage as a contract between two consenting adults. As a matter of religion, no, no, a thousand times no. The pastor might as well sanctify adultery or theft or murder or any of the other ways in which people sin. The message is, “You can be forgiven”, not, “Hey, it’s all good.”
John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
Only through Christ who was not put on this earth to judge or condemn, but to save.
Why do you believe it is your place to stand above Him?
I think one can point to a heck of a lot more schisms and reforms. And if the last two have lost their way it has been to culture, not dogma.
How is it that those who divorce, let alone divorce and remarry, always seem to be welcome and do not present a problem as habitual and unrepentant sinners? If you are going to be tough about one thing, how about being consistent. Sin is sin, even if the market for “spiritual product” won’t buy.
Taking your various assertions in order:
. . . always seem to be welcome . . .
All sinners are welcome. That’s not unusual.
do not present a problem as habitual and unrepentant sinners . . .
I cannot speak for all congregations or denominations, but on any number of occasions in my congregation, remarriage following divorce other than the exceptions mentioned by QM above, is labeled sin from the pulpit, and anyone in that situation who wishes to openly claim otherwise or encourage others to proceed down that path is asked to refrain from such instruction. And it has caused people to leave, not because they were unwelcome, but because they insisted upon claiming that their conduct was not sin.
Even if they remain and acknowledge the nature of their mistake, they are not allowed to hold leadership positions in the congregation.
Thank you for bringing john 8 it makes my point. lets include some context..
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
You used Jesus saying unto the woman “go and sin no more” as a right for you to judge her, and others
13 The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true.
14 Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go.
15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
you are arguing the same argument that the Pharisees were making.. is that really the side you want to be on?
Why do you believe it is your place to stand above Him?
A deliberate misstatement of the argument, the epitome of the Straw Man. How many injunctions exist in the New Testament regarding identifying false teachers and heresies? How is that to be accomplished without discernment? How is that done without reference to the full body of the Word? Without such discernment; if such discernment is anathema, then how do we instruct our children? How to we disciple our siblings in Christ?
I did not say it is right to judge her. I said and still do that judging actions and behavior as Sin and false teaching as heresy is an absolute necessity for our own spiritual well-being and for the instruction and discipleship of our children. If Christ did not judge her actions, why did he tell her to sin no more?
Let me ask it bluntly: Are Meeks’s statements Biblical? Do they comport with the teachings of the New Testament? Does Meeks do a disservice to those engaged in sinful behavior without repentance and even seek to define their behavior as not sinful?
That is the issue. You seek to conflate evaluating and defining behaviors as SIn/Not Sin as prohibited “judgement.” That way lies madness, for it removes any basis for informing those who are lost of the need for Christ.
you speak of many injunctions but offer none… interesting.
Only through the Son do you find a home with the Father. you do not get extra credit through the judgment and condemnation of others.
Matthew 10:24 The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.
25 It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord.
James4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.
11 Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.
12 There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?
Was Jesus’ argument a strawman too?
Does it get any clearer than Romans 2? you may follow the law all the way to the end but once you judge another you make it all undone.
This is the hardest thing for “Good Christians” to understand, your place is not in judgement of others, Jesus says it OVER AND OVER AND OVER again through the Gospels.
Romans 2
2 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.
3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?
4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,
18 And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law;
19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,
20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.
21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?
22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?
23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?
24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.
25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.
26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?
28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
2 Peter 2 (KJV).
If you knew the Bible as you claim, you’d know the verses yourself and know the truth of the statement I made.
As for the passages you quote, Matthew 10:24 is inapposite to this discussion. Further with regard to James 4, you leave out quite a bit, including verses 1-4:
4 From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?
2 Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
3 Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.
4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God. (KJV)
According to you, James is hopelessly judgmental.
How hard is it for you to read my comments which clearly distinguish between judging people and judging behavior and teaching?
Malachai 3:18
1 Corinthians 2:14
Hebrews 5:14
Who are you to say the words of Jesus are in apposite to the discussion?
who is he judging? speaking truth of a situation is not judgmental, when you judge is.
You may teach of the crime of sin, and what is a sinner, you however have no right to judge the sinner. saying committing adultery is a sin. is NOT Judgmental.
you however do not get to judge the sinner, for that is God’s right Alone.
you say i left out text, and i did, for brevity but why didn’t you include all the text of James? why did you stop at 1-4? If the point was to say that i was leaving out something as to deceive. Why then did you leave out the rest?
lets include the rest,
5 Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy?
6 But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.
8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.
9 Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness.
10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.
Did you read the other Scriptures I posted? If you cannot understand the difference between righteous judgment, which is very clearly part of our spiritual lives, and unrighteous judgment, then you are far from God.
The Bible must be read and understood in its entirety. You cannot cherry-pick Scriptures, as you have done above, out of the context of the entire Biblical message. By falsely accusing me of placing myself above my Redeemer, whom I clearly love, you are showing that you not only have not understood His Word, but that you are, in fact, judging me unrighteously.
p.s. Read Jesus’ many words to the Pharisees, and compare those words to the John passage about Him not coming to judge, and ask yourself whether there might be different forms of judgment, as defined by context.
That sort of rigid legalism was Jesus’ gripe with the Pharisees: obeying the letter of the law without regard to the spirit of the law.
Kind of like in Mark 2, when Jesus talks about David and his companions eating the Tabernacle shewbread. The letter of the law condemns that, but the spirit of the law reveals that God’s followers are purchased by the blood of the High Priest, it being therefore acceptable for members of the priests’ families to consume the temple food.
True, but I’m skeptical that this doesn’t also happen in smaller congregations. My church is attended by about 9000 families, and I’d estimate that at least half of those participate in one or more ministries, as my family does. That seems like a pretty healthy percentage; one that I would think would be comparable to a smaller church. Plus, the larger congregation size means that there are lots, and lots, and lots of diverse, interesting and fun ministries to choose from when one is called to service. Then again, our pastor does stress Christian servanthood quite strongly.
clearly…
how can one tell another they cant “cherry pick” then tell him to read their cherry picked verses?
i did not judge you i asked a question. I can no more judge you than i can judge any other person It is not in my power to judge others.
If you feel i have tresspassed against you i can only ask for your forgiveness. as i offered it to you earlier. I feel i have not, but thats up to you.
Either way i still Forgive you.
You have been shown your error multiple times by multiple people. May I suggest that you fast and pray for discernment and understanding?
by whom do you speak of?
only through Him do i take my direction, not through the eyes of man.
my prayer for my fellow man is constant and unending I will continue to pray for their understanding and hope He shows them the light to live in Him.
I do not pray for my understanding the Lord will speak to me on His own. To ask for myself is selfish i humble in the presence of the Lord.
I left it up to you to go read the Scriptures I gave you in their context, rather than quote massive passages verbatim in a blog post reply as you have done. As I have previously noted, you come to know the spirit of God’s commands via the context of the entire Bible. Are you going to copy and paste the KJV here in reply?
There are plenty of passages demonstrating that judgment of the actions of others is necessary, and you have been shown these, yet you keep repeating the same false interpretation. If your interpretation holds as you describe it, then the Bible has contradictions and is thus not inspired. How do you resolve your “no judgment” interpretation in light of all the other passages that you have been shown?
You are not here sharing the Gospel with unregenerate apostates. You yourself are here passing judgment upon us.
Where did i judge you again? I care not your status among others i care not if you are “unregenerate apostates” apparently you do.
I asked you questions so you can clarify your position not stand in judgement of you.
Your pridefulness is abundant.
James 1:5: “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.”
James, the brother of Jesus, encourages us to as God for wisdom, and He will give it. You don’t care about God at all, or you would know that.
I’m through giving what is sacred to dogs and casting pearls before swine. You’re a troll.
They say that rich guy was Saul…the one who became St. Paul.
On the contrary, neither has lost its way.
Which is why you read about Catholic churches whose music director or a parochial school teacher or principal are dismissed from their position; nor are those whose lifestyles are inconsistent with Church teaching allowed to teach religious education, give communion or act as lector. The divorced are welcome; however, whether or not they’re in a state to receive communion depends on circumstances.
…Churches admit sinners….”
No, Smitty, they don’t. Those who have come to Christ have ceased to be sinners. A sinner is someone for whom sin is simply a habit, a way of life. Anyone meeting that description is not a Christian. They may get admitted to membership, but only in a faux Christian church full of heretics.