Aug 292017
 

What is porneia to a first century Jew?

The rise and fall of the Christian bookstore…

Open letter to Francis Chan…

What is inerrant?

Why can’t there be organizations just for boys?

When kids are abused in church…

Joel Osteen won’t open his Houston church….

Communion, a counter monument…

Don’t tell hurting people that God is in control…

Dear church, I’m gay…

The Nashville Statement on human sexuality…

A missionaries call to the Psalms and deeper emotional intelligence…

What I wish St. Augustine would have said…

Chrysostom and the philanthropic God…

Osteen responds…

Did God command genocide in the Old Testament?

Former 700 Club producer spills the beans…

Where is God in our pain?

What the Christian life looks like…

Faith Groups already moving to help (Baptist News, Vineyard USA, LCMS, ACNA, SBC)- notice that this is NOT what GMA and other mainline media focus on

https://baptistnews.com/article/religious-groups-come-already-assisting-harvey-victims/#.WaVsDLKGPIU

https://vineyardusa.org/library/special-alert-convoy-of-hope-responds-to-hurricane-harvey/

https://www.lcms.org/harvey

http://www.anglicanchurch.net/?/main/page/1508

https://missionaries.namb.net/projects/full/hurricane-harvey-response

Thanks to EricL for getting us started this morning…support him at top right.

 

  112 Responses to “Linkathon!”

  1. I watched TBN last night as Joel Osteen and his wife were to be guests. Instead Matt and Laurie concentrated on Texas by interviewing Max Lucado, Mike Huckabee, Franklin Graham, John Hagee, and Beth moore.

    They ran contact information for Samaritan’s Purse throughout the program. I thought Franklin brought a good message and it’s clear his ministry is on the ground and doing what they can for those impacted by the hurricane and its aftermath.

    Max Lucado brought a nice message encouraging people to trust in God in desperate times.

    Beth Moore prayed scriptures for the events unfolding while seeking to encourage people.

    Mike Huckabee talked about how the government is responding and the job they are doing. He was more practical than others besides Franklin.

    Matt and Laurie announced that Huckabee will be having his own program on TBN come October.

    It seems more folks are appearing on TBN which in my mind is not good but is still happening.

    Matt showed checks for $100,000 each that TBN is donating. What struck me is one of the checks was going to Joel Osteen’s church. I suspect they may not need that money.

    It seems Hagee’s message was pre-recorded and was meant to encourage people.

    The guest in the studio encouraged churches to take an extra collection Sunday and send it to a Pastor if memory serves.

    Mike Huckabee did mention that warehousing scores of people in huge arenas, etc. might not be the best idea due to illnesses being spread, etc.

    I imagine the program will repeat today. My memory fails me at times but the above is the best as I can remember.

  2. I wonder if I might add a link

    https://vimeo.com/231166638

  3. Well this is a hearty meal of links

  4. BD,

    I’m going to put that video in the main article…thanks.

  5. Hurricane Harvey is a mind boggling event to which nobody’s words can add anything constructive … IMHO… my heart breaks for the city

    Joel Osteen is lame – i might change my mind if he’d follow the lead of his fellow Houstonians (bet he doesn’t think of himself as one of “them”) – if he opened his purse till it was as drained as those poor folk down there … i guess that there won’t be much need for the prosperity gospel on-going in Houston…
    glad Samaritan’s Purse is on the scene as they are among the organized and professional aid groups…

    the church should be mature enough to handle Christians who are plagued with same sex attraction… as well as a lot of other things … sigh… Luke 18:7-9 or thereabouts comes to mind …

    enough of my opinions… thanks for another great set of links to think on today

  6. I know that the closing of Christian bookstores seems to leave a void, and causes and of course issues with people losing their jobs. I however get fed up with bookstores and even online booksellers carrying transparent heretics that are described as Word of Faith or New Apostloic Reformers. While “popular” it seems like those who determine what authors they promote on their shelves are more concerned with gross profit, than sound and biblical theology. It one thing for Barnes and Noble to have a large in stock supply of Joyce Neyers, Joel Osteen just to name a few, but a self described Christian company, is at best troubling. It is though what the American church seems to want. Self help, easy answers, and an idolatrous fascination with celebrity pulpit fillers. Sound theology….meh. Many will settle for falsehood because too many are unconcerned with truth, and lack biblical discernment.

  7. Not sure we really needed the Nashville Statement. With all we’ve said about sexual issues, if we haven’t been clear yet we should just give up and move on.

  8. josh, got some wood, two large trees for you if you want it…. dust.shaker@gmail.com

  9. ?

  10. There is one last surviving “Christian Bookstore” in our area. They have more chachkies, trinkets, decorations, and greeting cards than books. It used to be well stocked with books, now it’s essentially like a tourist trap gift shop for Jesus. However, it wouldn’t matter much, as I gave up reading most of the Christian pablum of this age.

    I was going to say something about the Nashville Statement, but I couldn’t care less what John Piper says.

    Francis Chan is just out shilling for himself.

    “American Civil Religion” in the guise of Evangelicalism is circling the drain. I’m actually hopeful that we have a revival of the faith that throws out the trappings of the last couple of hundred years of “American Christianity,” and is something vital and alive. Funny thing is, my faith tells me it will happen, sooner or later.

  11. Wrong person?

  12. oops!

  13. 🙂

  14. Dusty,

    We discussed wood a few months ago if I remember correctly. Maybe you are thinking of someone else? I live in Washington State so that might be too long of a drive for me. 🙂

    “WHAT THE CHRISTIAN LIFE LOOKS LIKE”

    So simple and profound. The Isaiah verse never fails to astonish.

  15. I can’t find anything wrong with the Nashville Statement – sounds biblical to me.
    It’s odd if church people are against it.
    I can see the world not liking it, but heck, they don’t care for the 10 commandments very much either.

  16. The Nashville Statement contains several serious theological errors, which render it terrible on its face, but actually abusive if used as an instrument of pastoral care or counseling.

  17. The Nashville statement is a political document designed to see who doesn’t sign it.
    I’m still waiting for the statement on divorce…

  18. So which statements would you claim are unbiblical, or which if followed by an individual would be displeasing to God?

    Instead of evaluating the document on its own face, you both seem to be imposing motives.

  19. The fact that there is no similar document on divorce in no way cheapens or invalidates this document.

  20. MLD,

    It’s hypocrisy and taking on low hanging fruit.
    It’s so easy to keep taking shots outside the group…

  21. I see that JI Packer and Richard Moore signed it. Are you sure you actually read it?
    My wife and I have lived this credo for almost 50 yrs. We do not feel abused by this paper. Do you?

  22. I would also note that this bunch is involved in a Trinitarian dispute as many of the clan believe in the eternal subordination of the Son…which they use to defend the eternal subordination of women.

    I would suggest it more important to debate that matter than this…

  23. I can affirm the first article…much of the rest is open to discussion.
    I won’t sign it, but no one will notice. 🙂

  24. The Nashville Statement is riddled with false doctrine. Take Article VIII for example:

    “WE AFFIRM that people who experience sexual attraction for the same sex may live a rich and fruitful life pleasing to God through faith in Jesus Christ, as they, like all Christians, walk in purity of life.”

    What (or should I say “who”) makes our life pleasing to God? Compare Article VIII to the Bible.

    Where in the Bible are Christians promised or given the power to “walk in purity of life.” Can anyone make that claim, much less “all Christians”?

    When life is fruitful, who is the actor? Who works in the Christian to “will and to work”? Is it my “free will” or God?

    This is just the tip of the iceberg. The Statement is even worse than my initial reaction.

  25. Regardless of whether I agree with the statement or not, and I won’t dig into deep enough to find out, alot of people I like are promoting it. I would assume that is because it is Denny Burk’s project, and he is friends with all the people I like.

    My biggest problem with this statement is that we’ve made ourselves clear about homosexuality ad nauseum. You aren’t convincing anyone else with this new statement. If anything, it serves to alienate more people who could possibly be influenced in the relationship of a local church.

    At this point, constant focus on homosexuality is starting to sound like bullying.

  26. Jean, that is your Methodist background speaking in support of homosexuality. I can see the rainbow banners flapping in the wind behind you as you make your case. 🙂

  27. Josh, we have made ourselves clear about Jesus Christ also ad nauseum and people of the world want us to shut up Or they want us to shut up —- but that does not stop us. Well, at least it does not stop me.

  28. I’d rather be clear about Jesus 1 million times than twice about homosexuality.

    Do you think those two doctrines are on equal footing?

  29. #28 Josh

    For what it is worth, I’m with you.

    More than anything else, the Nashville Statement reminds me of the elderly Roman Senators debating in the Forum as the Goths and Vandals stream through the gates of Rome. They accomplished nothing, apart from giving evidence of their own insularity and impotence as far as the world at large was concerned.

  30. Of course, Article XII is just as bad:

    “WE AFFIRM that the grace of God in Christ gives both merciful pardon and transforming power, and that this pardon and power enable a follower of Jesus to put to death sinful desires and to walk in a manner worthy of the Lord.”

    Lutherans do not believe in infused grace.

    We never divorce grace from the means of grace.

    Grace is not a power a Christian wields with his/her free will.

    The Holy Spirit, not the follower, transforms the believer, not by putting to death sinful desires, but by putting to death the sinner and creating a new being in Christ.

    A “manner worthy of the Lord” is to boast in the Lord, not in my free will.

    The article does not properly distinguish desires from actions, thereby denying concupiscence.

  31. For what it’s worth Josh, sometimes statements like this provide a case study in precisely how not to do pastoral counseling or care and how not to catechize a congregation on current moral issues.

  32. Most of the people I’ve seen promoting this are SBC leaders. The Baptist Faith and Message 2000 is very clear on this. I don’t understand the extra line in the sand at all.

  33. You guys think this is just a top down reply or enforcement when it very well could be an attempt to answer the questions pastors have on these topics.

    The LCMS has an appointed committe to do this very thing – to guide pastors on how to answer or give pastoal care. It is the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) and deals with what they are assigned. I know the last thing I saw they were working on was the LCMS position on immigration.

    They deal with all the same marriage and sexuality / man – woman issues as we see in this credo.

    Sometimes they deal with bad theology destroying the church – I know of 2 works – 1 on the end times and 1 specifically on the Left Behind books.

    https://www.lcms.org/about/leadership/commission-on-theology-and-church-relations/documents

  34. Jean –
    “The article does not properly distinguish desires from actions, thereby denying concupiscence.”
    your issue isn’t with the substance of the article but actually (like me) BS evangelical theology.

    But I’m sticking with JI Packer on this one – 🙂

  35. #26, 34,

    Prov 15:12

  36. Jean’s interpretation of Proverbs 15:12 = “shut up and don’t disagree with me.”

  37. Did you sign it yet, MLD?

  38. Josh, I don’t sign anything – not even petitions I agree with outside of the grocery store.

  39. So, you are just playing devil’s advocate.

  40. Does signing something make my beliefs more powerful or something? I can agree with something without my signature attached.
    Now you are using their tactics. Zero sum game – winner take all.

  41. “Now you are using their tactics.”

    Who’s tactics? The people you have been defending this whol thread?!?!

    HAHA, you are a trip 🙂

  42. I have not defended anyone – my first comment was pretty neutral and non confrontational;
    “I can’t find anything wrong with the Nashville Statement – sounds biblical to me.
    It’s odd if church people are against it.
    I can see the world not liking it, but heck, they don’t care for the 10 commandments very much either.”

    But I forgot that many times here at PP that many of the Linkathon articles are not posted for discussion but for ridicule.

  43. I still wonder if the article posted was actually read. How does this paragraph get missed as the guidance for the credo?

    “It is built on the persuasion that the Christian Scriptures speak with clarity and authority for the good of humankind. It is permeated by the awareness that we are all sinners in need of divine grace through Jesus Christ. It affirms with joy that no form of sexual sin is beyond forgiveness and healing. It touches the most fundamental and urgent questions of the hour, without presuming to be a blueprint for political action. And it will prove to be, I believe, enormously helpful for thousands of pastors and leaders hoping to give wise, biblical, and gracious guidance to their people.”

    And then still be accused of everything opposite than what is stated?

  44. MLD,

    Who among us has any questions about our particular groups stance on gay marriage?

    You keep mentioning Dr. Packer…(who I wager probably hasn’t read this either)… was there a question about what Packer believes?
    Not if you know who J.I. Packer is…

    I personally don’t find the statement to be “enormously helpful”, nor will I refer to it to “give wise, biblical, and gracious guidance”… as if I was just waiting for the evangelical glitterati to help me out after twenty plus years in ministry.

    In fact, it’s pretty lame compared to Packers own teachings that present affirmation of gay marriage as a denial of the Gospel to homosexuals.

    I prefer Duane Arnold’s one sentence affirmation that we are in no position to deny 2000 years of moral theology…

  45. I hardly ever enter the discussions here anymore, but I sure enjoy dropping in to watch MLD and Josh banter. 🙂 At least they both agree about Rick Warren. (wink)

  46. Michael – my comments about Packer were in support of he could do no wrong 🙂 – also my mention of Russell Moore was the same as you have proclaimed him on several occasions to be the bright light of the SBC on these quasi biblical / social / political issues.

    The fact that you wouldn’t use such a document in no way renders it void or ineffective.

    My point was that this is not new to Christianity to have documents to set out a biblical position. People fought like dogs over the development and writing of the Nicene Creed – imagine if they had blogs. Didn’t Athanasius punch Santa Claus in the nose during one of these confrontations?

  47. Hey it’s Sweaty Bob! 🙂

  48. Joel, that’s right, sorry about that….yeah that would be a drive…the township picked up all the wood today.

  49. #46 MLD

    No, Athanasius did not. Additionally, Athanasius attended the Council as a deacon to Archbishop Alexander of Alexandria…

    Another gem from everyone’s favorite crazy Uncle at the holiday meal…

  50. MLD,

    Who was this written for?

    All those names have already written vast amounts on the topic for years.

    Is this supposed to replace the ACNA statement I already affirm?
    Are you going to suggest that the LCMS adopt this…as if they didn’t already have a position paper on the issue?

    There’s a back story on this somewhere…

  51. Oh yeah, my mistake it was Santa Claus who punched Arius at the council of Nicea – and as Duane pointed out, I was in error, it wasn’t the nose it was in the mouth.

    But in Duane’s efforts to always be nit picky right, he blows over the point, that even something such as the creeds bring division – but the division does not make it void.

  52. Michael – you may be 100% clear on these issues but there is much confusion as exampled yesterday in the Preston Sprinkle’s video where he flat out says that his “new” friend’s, while living lifestyles in unrepentant sin – that he Preston Sprinkle sees the image of God.

    This causes great confusion to some – it causes me to wonder if he even knows Jesus but that is another topic.

    So for someone to try to offer more clarity in an area that you have already settle – it’s like, well you can move on and let them do their work. And to answer your other question, no the LCMS doesn’t need to adopt it as we have something in place – but the ELCA wouldn’t hurt themselves to pay a bit of attention.

  53. I just skimmed the Nashville Statement and saw that it is quite similar to documents produced by various Orthodox jurisdictions.

    It’s a good document.

  54. MLD,

    I know way too many people who would affirm this document that live in unrepentant sin of a different kind…but we don’t write papers about our own stuff…

  55. Thank you for the offer Dusty. That was very thoughtful, sweet and kind.

    We love our crazy uncle at the holiday meal. lol. 🙂

  56. @ 52 – MLD – did you watch that video? All those people we re living repentant lifestyles, either in heterosexual marriages or celibate.

  57. Josh – correct, but he was speaking in the beginning when he was meeting his “new” friends – before their change.

  58. Just for the record…Preston Sprinkle is one of my favorite theologians.
    His work in this area has been very helpful.
    Why anyone would question his relationship to Jesus is beyond me.

  59. That’s OK, I can see that I have been voted off the island as having a position that doesn’t condemn people for trying to stand for truth — even if they do not get it all right.

    In fact since we all sin, we should not speak against sin at all. This point has been made very clear.

  60. #51 MLD

    “Oh yeah, my mistake it was Santa Claus who punched Arius at the council of Nicea – and as Duane pointed out, I was in error, it wasn’t the nose it was in the mouth.”

    Even that is a 14th century myth… I thought you Lutherans had given up all those medieval fables… You might consider giving up the Church history comic book you’re relying on.

  61. My primary issue with the Church… I’m Gay video is that it assumes that homosexuality is a naturally occurring phenomena. If we are made and continue to be made in God’s image, male and female, this seems problematic, to put it mildly.

  62. MLD,

    Are there more pressing moral truths that we need to stand for?
    How many times do we need to draw this line?

    I still say that the state of marriage among heterosexuals in this country needs a clear statement…but that would offend those in the tribe.

  63. OK.

    So Sprinkle’s relationship moved them to repentance, and now he is celebrating that?

    Do we have to say, “If you are gay, ever been gay, or looked to long at a poster of Magnum PI you are going to Hell”?

    I just don’t get it. And I read some more of the Nashville statement. 2 or 3 points I could agree with no further explanation. Most were less clear than other statements already in place. And I think these guys don’t have any idea what is going on with Transgenders, and probably shouldn’t speak on it at all.

  64. Descended, things go awry in nature due to the fall. We all know this when it comes to cancer or birth defects, why does it shock us that sexuality gets screwed up?

  65. Josh just won the internets today @64.

    All of creation is groaning for redemption…

    @63 was the runner up.
    Good stuff, Josh.

  66. Michael,
    “I still say that the state of marriage among heterosexuals in this country needs a clear statement…but that would offend those in the tribe.”

    That clear statement of proper marriage of heterosexuals was contained in the document and even a hint about divorce. You must have missed it.

  67. Josh won just for referring to a Magnum PI poster. 🙂

  68. MLD,

    I didn’t miss it…it was just very brief and didn’t address the crisis we face.

    I feel strange constantly telling other people how to clean their house when my vacuum has been broken for a month…

  69. “All of creation is groaning for redemption…”

    I know that I am…

  70. KevinH,

    Yes! 🙂

  71. There is an 800 pound gorilla in the room. Can we just say that under the current administration there are people who want to make a point about rolling back GLBT advances made under the last administration on a state and, if possible, federal level. In the current atmosphere that believe statements such as this will add additional pressure from a voting bloc that went 81% for Mr. Trump.

    Josh and others are correct – there was no pressing need for yet another statement. Michael is right – there is a back story.

  72. The Baptist faith and Message has great statements about divorce, homosexuality, and all sorts of stuff.

    Again, why would an SBC leader sign this document which also adds that we can’t agree to disagree? That’s my beef. I don’t love the document, but I really don’t understand the purpose.

  73. I think Duane just nailed it…

  74. Well, if anyone thinks that 5 yr old transgendered kids has already been addressed by the church or the crime of assuming a person’s gender is settled in the church – I beg to differ.

  75. So should we go kidnap that kid from the parent? Because that is where the problem lies.

  76. I don’t even know why I argue with you. These things always get sillier and sillier.

    Anywho, I said what I thought about the statement. Could have stopped there.

  77. I don’t know how these first two are brief and incomplete – the sound very definite to me.
    #1 = WE AFFIRM that God has designed marriage to be a covenantal, sexual, procreative, lifelong union of one man and one woman, as husband and wife, and is meant to signify the covenant love between Christ and his bride the church.

    #2 = WE AFFIRM that God’s revealed will for all people is chastity outside of marriage and fidelity within marriage.

    The backside of #2 could not be any more clear about the current day crisis in marriage
    #2 = WE DENY that any affections, desires, or commitments ever justify sexual intercourse before or outside marriage; nor do they justify any form of sexual immorality.

  78. “marriage to be a covenantal, sexual, procreative, ”

    If there is some physical reason that a marriage is not sexual, or the couple cannot produce kids, is that still a marriage in God’s eyes?

  79. Josh – you tell me, when God says to go be fruitful and multiply – are those who cannot reproduce some how being disobedient to God?
    (the right answer is no – what is your answer?)

  80. Another silly spin…

    But that’s my point. If you can shoot a hole in the first statement. Well, marriages that don’t produce children can still be glorifying to God, then the next person could say, well, marriages that have two men can be glorifying to God.

    It’s poorly written.

  81. Josh – so don’t use it, but don’t be critical of those who do find it helpful. Do not be judging your good SBC brothers for not seeing things your way.

  82. Oh good grief, you crack me up.

    I have asked those SBC brothers what the purpose is and have not gotten an answer back yet. Mohler was on the committee that wrote the BF&M2000, and he’s been pushing this thing. I asked him if his statements in 2000 weren’t strong enough.

  83. Why can’t it be a new edition of the same thing written for a new generation in a new way?
    If you are speaking of the BF&M2000 – well why wasn’t the previous one (that I used when I was SBC) good enough? Why did it need to be restated?

    There is a good chance that more people will read this in its internet format than the number of people who have actually read through the BF&M 2000.

  84. 1.) If it is a Southern Baptist statement, then it has to go through the convention. If there is a need for updating the BF&M, it will be voted on by the convention, a committee will be appointed, etc. Denny Burk and the SBC big wigs don’t just get to say, “This is the new statement”.

    2.) The BF&M is easily accessible online – http://www.sbc.net/bfm2000/bfm2000.asp
    If the Nashville statement is getting pushed more than their own confession of faith…why is that?

  85. Michael

    totally agree. Hereto marriage in the church needs to be hemmed in. To many think anything goes, including sexual abuse of their spouse and vows in the name of freedom.

    Josh the B.

    First and foremost there is zero proof that gender has gone awry. Other things of recent “discovery” may have been around for as long as humans have been around. As far as I can tell, dna still allows that boys have penises and girls have a vaginas. The psychology of a person’s relationship with their own body is soft science at best, chock full of variables and interactions with and within an environment.

    Second, the argument used to “testify” of one’s innate homosexual nature (especially the folks who have “known” since early childhood) depends upon a testament of early aversion to one set of nurtured, culturally accepted gender practices in their external environment in lieu of the reinforcement one finds in the opposite display of the other gender (boys in blue with trucks and sticks and girls in pink with dolls and silk). Moreover, it seems to be a mainly western issue. I know homosexuals are global, but the percentage is growing and greater in western society by far where the environment allows for it and demands protections and advocation for it.

    If homosexuality were innate, why do those who’ve known since early childhood depend on information they appropriate from outward displays of gender by the other sex?

  86. Do you think there is a level of nurture that could turn you gay?

  87. Josh the B

    Certainly. But wouldn’t that be coercion, and thus abuse?

    https://www.google.com/amp/sacramento.cbslocal.com/2017/08/22/rocklin-parents-grill-school-board-over-transgender-discussions-in-kindergarten/amp/
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/

    http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Transgender-Kids-Eligible-for-Earlier-Medical-Intervention-Under-New-Guidelines-423082734.html%3famp=y

    In the dance way one can raise their child to eschew any religious doctrine and form their worldview as atheistic, so parents can form their child’s worldview to think as a homosexual, or that one’s identity stems from gender.

  88. Well, I don’t think I could be gay, no matter what.

    I think I could be a serial adulterer if I tried really hard. Seems to be a sexual deviance built into my system. I must deny those urges, just like homosexuals have to deny any urges they may have.

    I’ll admit, I don’t really care if they were born that way or were just that way for as long as they remember. It makes very little difference to me.

  89. Look at the opposite way: severe neglect and a history of childhood sexual abuse is known to result in sexual identity crises.

    My buddy’s sister is diagnosed with BPD, Depression, Anxiety and PTSD (some of which are a result of unfettered sexual freedom at a young age enabled by hippie parents). Once a sweet girl and open, her daughter now sufferes from anxiety and depression. Father abandoned them (both mother and father had/have major issues). BPD mother married, and that resulted much like the first marriage: infidelity and domestic violence on both sides. The 2nd husband was supposed to adopt the little girl. 3rd long-term boyfriend was also supposedly going to adopt this girl. Mental illness and domestic abuse on mom’s side resulted in that long term r/s ending suddenly. So now the little girl was on the 3rd older male whom she called “dad.” There was another long term bf (there were short termers in-between). Gone. Then at 14, little girl suddenly strikes up a friendship with a slightly older teen, and says she is gay. BPD mother applauds this and celebrates it publicly. BPD mother also posted on facbook a few years ago that she was “pan-sexual.” Can’t judge any of this according to the current conventional “wisdom.” Just found out that the mom is moving in an 18 year old girl, along with her 15 year old daughter and 16 year old girlfriend. I won’t even speculate that this sounds extremely suspicious and the young daughter is likely going to be abused if not already. Mom’s parents tolerated her having an 18 year old boyfriend at 14 (so they enabled criminal statutory rape back in the day). So where does that leave D15? To me, having watched this from afar for so many years, my first thought was, “of course she’s going to choose girls. Every single male in her life betrayed and abandoned her. The emotional message she grew up with is that men aren’t safe.”

    Mom is pan-sexual (or bi-leaning). Daughter is lesbian. There’s a correlation here, but we aren’t supposed to judge the “whys” but rather accept the “ares” with no judgment. I;m not even suggesting judgment, or reversion therapy, but rather looking at the root causes of trauma. I know other stories similar, but maybe not so complicated.

    In some societies, such as in Afghanistan, pederasty is ingrained into the culture and little boys know it, but that’s another issue…

  90. I guess the Xns United wins — they have more signatories.

    What about the rest of us?

  91. Lord, have mercy.

  92. Xns United… they say that the Holy Spirit is calling them to rethink church dogmas? As in rewrite the Book? good luck with that… sounds more like a new diet of worms, real worms

    Lord, give them wisdom and understanding before they condemn themselves, not for affirming people – help us all to do that – but for compromising You and Your incredible grace to us

  93. Unbelievable…and yet, not surprising that people would continue to “debate” homosexual “marriage”, or how the church should respond to those self-identifying, or self-conceptualizing, which is just a bunch of nuanced nonsense. Simply…it’s sin, at least according to Paul in the book of Romans, and it is an intentional demonstration, and one that like other sexual sin is something one does against themselves primarily. The answer is the simplicity of the Gospel, and a call to follow Him. It is the epitomy of a counter cultural life of devotion, worship and obedience to Him who can save and rescue. Further, the new debate about transgender, is an utter joke, that sadly we believe we have to “empathy” for. No, it’s simply men and women who follow the purveyors and crafters of more expressions of sexual deviency, and call it community, and something we were asked to understand then tolerate, now we are asked to acknowledge, accept, and promote, or be regarded as hatemongers. Sadly, or brethren who are laying their lives down, facing persecution for not acquiescing to what their culture and government demand look at us and wonder why the American “church” continues to wallow in senseless debates and do little to comfort them as they try and advance His Kingdom. Get a life people….

  94. Ron you are right. Really the debate has nothing to do with sexuality – everyone knows that adultery, sex outside of marriage, homosexuality, transgender etc is wrong – even those who participate in it and try to defend it.

    The problem is that people do not believe the Bible – it is that simple. I don’t know how many times I read the objection to be – well that is Pauline – Jesus didn’t say that.

    What they have done, and I have seen it with many defenders here, is they discount 1/2 of the Bible to be ‘lesser’ or completely irrelevant.

    So, the debate is strictly about the scriptures.

  95. Nobody here has debated gay marriage or the sinfulness of homosexual activity.

  96. The think is, the Christian resolve to stand up for sexual morality is eroding like a cake left out in the rain. If groups feel the need to restate the biblical view, I am all for it.

  97. Just look at that “Christians” United link if you don’t think clear statements regarding human sexuality need to be boldly proclaimed again and again.

  98. You folks are objecting to this Nashville Statement because:

    1. You don’t like the people behind it
    2. You don’t think it’s nuanced enough
    3. You don’t think it’s necessary because such statements already exist
    4. You are bugged because there is a back story.

    I think the fact that Rachel Held Evans hates it is good enough to commend it.

  99. Xenia, I really don’t think it helps for us to yell our view over and over and then they yell their view over and over. (Your #3 I suppose)
    They have a phrase that we can’t agree to disagree. On what? The entire statement? Some of it? The exact wording on it? The problem with that is the SBC has a statement of faith that includes these issues and one must confirm the BF&M to be employed by any of the agencies or to be a missionary. Are these SBC leaders now saying we must also agree to this extra language to be in fellowship (can’t agree to disagree)? With no discussion, no vote, no nothing? Are you upset that EO people aren’t promoting this more?

    For the record, 1. I do like the people behind it, very much. 2. I think it’s too nuanced. Poorly written in places. 3. Yes. 4. I am. It feels as if there is an ulterior motive.

    Even if you are saying a good thing, you can say it for bad reasons. And that’s bad.

  100. Are you upset that EO people aren’t promoting this more?<<<

    What makes you say this?

    Every EO jurisdiction has put out a similar statement.

    Our Archbishop came to our parish to make sure we were all clear on the subject.

  101. Ok, then what if they suddenly put out another statement and said to be in fellowship, you have to sign this? That’s what it feels like here. The SBC has always been clear on these issues.

  102. Signing papers to be in fellowship is outside my experience so the idea is odd on the face of it.

  103. Well that is what the statement says. We can not agree to disagree.

  104. Each Baptist church is autonomous, right? Wouldn’t paper-signing be something the board of deacons would have to vote for? I imagine there are things like this already happening in some places. <— Just a guess, I don't know.

  105. Xenia, yes. Which is why I am questioning the promotion of this document by SBC guys.

  106. On this topic, I don’t believe there is much room for disagreement about the content of the Statement. It is the consequences of not agreeing with it you are concerned about. Disfellowship. It would shrink the membership roles, I suspect, and not only for Baptist churches.

    You are concerned that topic is being made a faith-test, like offering the pinch of incense to Caesar was in the first few centuries of the faith.

    Well, would you say it would be reasonable to say the people who openly agree with homosexual marriage (not homosexual themselves, just have a liberal view) should not be a teacher or a deacon in a church?

  107. yes. Which is why I am questioning the promotion of this document by SBC guys.<<<

    Ok, that makes sense. They are trying to enforce church polity on a group of autonomous fellowships. I think I am starting to see your objection.

  108. Because there is no Baptist Magisterium.

  109. Sometimes here- and you have noted this yourself, Josh- there is an automatic dismissal of anything that comes from the Evangelical camp.

  110. You said that better than I did, Xenia. Thanks. That is what I was trying to say.

    And no, a person with a liberal view of homosexuality would not be a teacher or deacon in an SBC church. (I suppose they could slip by, but in general, no)

  111. Josh says; “Ok, then what if they suddenly put out another statement and said to be in fellowship, you have to sign this? That’s what it feels like here. The SBC has always been clear on these issues.”

    No one asked you to sign it. They had a place if you wanted to sign it. Do you feel some one is checking to see if your name is properly affixed?

    I agree with the statement even though I may have varying theological nuances – and I did not sign it as I feel no obligation. I will stand by my Baptist brothers as they stand up to fight the works of the devil. So many say it is obvious what the church believes on sexual sin (and remember the NS is perfectly clear that they are also opposing heterosexual sin on the same level as the LBGTXYZ sin) – but it is not clear as stated by the Denver statement which theologically is making the claim that the holy spirit has told the 21st century church that all is well with LGBTXYZ – nothing wrong, no repentance required in fact you may be in sin if you are not actually actively celebrating it.

    I really like what Xenia said – “I think the fact that Rachel Held Evans hates it is good enough to commend it.”

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)

%d bloggers like this: