Last night I attended a panel discussion at Queens University of Charlotte. During this event the documentary “For the Bible Tells Me So” was shown, and after the film a panel of ‘Christian’ thinkers dialoged about the film and the issues surrounding homosexuality and the church.
The panelists illustrated a wide range of viewpoints under the banner of ‘Christianity’,
Mike Deal (Cross & Crown Lutheran), Chris Ayers (Wedgewood Baptist Church) Catherine Houchins (Metropolitan Community Church), and Roberta Dunn (Charlotte Gender Alliance).
On the more conservative end;
Dr. Michael Brown (Line of Fire Ministries), Michael A. Stevens (University City Church of God in Christ), and Derek Radney (Calvary Baptist Church).
My Initial Thoughts
This film has an agenda, namely to illustrate the incompatibility of Historic Orthodox Evangelical Christian beliefs with those who claim to be Christian’s and continue in the homosexual lifestyle. But, this film unfairly characterizes Christian’s as always responding inappropriately to this issue. While it is true that many people of homosexual orientation are hurt by the unloving responses of their Churched loved ones when the issue surfaces, this is no reason to ‘throw the baby out with the bathwater’. The church is full of sinful people.
As a Christian, I believe that we are all sinful beings. We all need salvation from our destructive nature. This is the reason God sent his only Son, Jesus Christ, to live a perfect life (upholding God’s law) and die (as a substitution for you and I, consuming God’s wrath against sin). When Christ rose again on the third day he defeated sin and death for all who would have faith in Him. This is the Gospel! The church is full of imperfect people who must rely on the grace of God, and exhibit that grace to others.
Often times Christians illustrate this sinful nature in our treatment of others. When it comes to the more emotionally heightened issues, the effects can be disastrous. While I acknowledge that many have been hurt in this capacity, I also acknowledge that ‘within the church’ we are called to gather around God’s truth and confess it as true, even when it hurts. God’s word calls us to a standard of living!
Last night I head several of the panelists (who are pastor’s) say things like;
“The Bible is not a manual for human sexuality, but the story of God’s love for humanity”
“At our church we do not care about who you are or where you come from, we understand the concept of God’s inclusive love”
To this I would respond, yes God is a God of love, but He is also just! We cannot minimize the reality of sin because it is not compatible with our sentiment. God’s love is inclusive in the sense that all who place their faith in Jesus will be saved. But its not inclusive in the sense that ‘all will be saved regardless of their beliefs and lives’. All who are truly saved will show it by their lives– in a desire to live according to God’s word. Just as we saw last night, Christians will not always be understood or even liked! But as sinful human beings, Christians should desire to live according to God’s word. This means that a Christian cannot continue in sin without repentance.
I pray that we as Christian’s would exhibit God’s love to those who are confused and desire to seek help with their struggles. We are all sinners in desperate need of the Gospel! We cannot minimize God’s truth on the issue of homosexuality, and we must “speak the truth in love“. One panelist eloquently said, “in this film we see many people speaking the truth, but not in love. On the other hand, we see many people speaking love, but not in truth.”
Here are a few informative resources on the issue of homosexuality;
1. Dr. Albert Mohler (A Proper Christian Perspective On the Cultural Issues of Homosexuality)
2. Dr. John Piper (A Pastoral Perspective on Relating to Homosexual’s in a Christian Manner…scroll down past sermons)
3. J.I. Packer (On Homosexuality in the Anglican Church)
4. Robert Gagnon (Scholarly Defender of the Church’s Historic Understanding of Homosexuality as Revealed in the Bible)
5. David Powlison (A Perspective on Biological Tendencies and Homosexuality)
This past weekend First Baptist Church of Durham NC held a conference titled ‘The Politics of Jesus: Timeless Answers to Today’s Questions“. Below is the purpose of the seminar;
“This seminar is designed for pastors, church leaders, government and public policy leaders, medical ethicists and physicians, business and entrepreneurial leaders, members of the legal community, university students and members of the social services community to listen and interact with key evangelical leaders from around the nation on matters of culture, government, and politics. Issues which will be directly addressed include marriage, political activity by the church, Islamic theology, and racism.”
Among the participants were Dr. David Nelson and Dr. Nathan Finn from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.
Owen Strachan of the Carl F. H. Henry Center for Theological Understanding at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School live-blogged the event. He has compiled his posts, including Strachan’s manuscript and Nelson’s notes, here. You may also listen to each message via podcast by going to the conference website.
Christian’s often affirm that ‘God is good’. But, we often confuse the sense in which this sentence is applied to life situations.
As a Christian, one must acknowledge the foundational truth that God is good intrinsically (Deut. 32:4; Nah. 1:2,7; Jas. 1:13), namely, in Him ‘there is no variation or shadow due to change’ (Jas. 1:13). God’s goodness is never contingent on any event within created order (good or evil). One must acknowledge that it is different to speak of God being good, and something being good in the sense that it is favorable, a type of prescriptive good, which can be relative to the evaluator (for a good discussion see Bruce Little, A Creation Order Theodicy).
Also, while this distinction exists, it is important to note that nothing within this world can be prescriptively good without a necessary being, God, who is intrinsically good. This distinction is often blurred when dealing with the more difficult situations of life, leading some to conclude that God’s benevolence towards creation should be questioned since experience attests to the horrible realities of evil and suffering. Some would be tempted to conclude, based on the experiences of life that ‘God is not good’, a notion that the Christian must reject (Deut. 7:7-8; Jn. 15:9-17; 1 Jn. 4:10; Ps. 145:16).
God’s goodness is closely related to different aspects of His nature, “among them love, mercy, patience, and grace” (Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology), and must be treated together in unity. God is the final standard of good, for He himself is good.
There is a inseparability in the pursuit of truth from the task of theology. If all truth is God’s truth, then all things must be informed by theology in one sense or another. Therefore, building a theological grid that will aid in the interpretation of the wisdom of the world is the task of every Christian. Just as Paul exhorts Timothy to be a steward of sound words and a guardian of doctrinal treasure (2 Timothy 1:13-14), so should we. Thus, our starting point is Biblical material and from here we see the need for organization of these materials, thus the exercise of systematic theology. Millard Erickson provides a helpful organizational chart in moving from Bible exegesis to building a theological system systematically (Pg. 70).
1. Collection of Biblical Materials
2. Unification of Biblical Materials
3. Analysis of the Meaning of Biblical Teachings
4. Examination of Historical Treatments *
5. Consultation of other Cultural Perspectives.
6. Identification of the Essence of the Doctrine.
7. Illumination of Extrabiblical Sources.
8. Contemporary Expression of the Doctrine.
9. Development of a Central Interpretive Motif.
10. Stratification of the Topics.
Moving through this process develops a systematic approach in developing a theology that is accurate to biblical teaching, and develops the theological framework which should inform us in all areas of thought. Theology informs proper practical application. From a proper theology comes a proper philosophy of life, and out of this philosophy comes practical everyday application. Therefore, proper theology forms the grid by which we interpret, and validate all life decisions.
*“The best way to guard a true interpretation of Scripture, the Reformers insisted, was neither to naively embrace the infallibility of tradition, or the infallibility of the individual, but to recognize the communal interpretation of Scripture. The best way to ensure faithfulness to the text is to read it together, not only with the churches of our own time and place, but with the wider ‘communion of saints’ down through the age.” Michael Horton
I recently picked up a copy of “Total Church: A Radical Reshaping around Gospel and Community“. This book is written by the co-founders of The Crowded House, a church planting initiative in Sheffield, UK.
In this book they encapsulate the work of evangelism into the picture of a ‘three stranded rope’.
“Like three strands of a piece of rope, our approach to mission should involve these three elements.” They stress, “when considering this model, it is important to avoid imposing a supposed logical sequence.”
a. Building Relationships
b. Sharing the Gospel
c. Introducing People to Community
This model takes the corporate dimension of evangelism seriously. In this model the Gospel community exhibits the Gospel word.
“The Holy Spirit brings the church into existance through the gospel word. Through that same gospel word he continues to change people so that they become less lovers of self and more lovers of God and others. This is the community life that models the gospel because it is the life for which we were made. As non-Christians are exposed to this dynamic, they begin to see that the gospel word is more than a set of propositions to be assented to. They see it as the very power of God for healing and wholeness, as the word that brings life and blessing.” (67)
Good stuff…
This is a great resource. The Gospel Coalition has one purpose; and they write “Our desire is to serve the church we love by inviting all of our brothers and sisters to join us in an effort to renew the contemporary church in the ancient gospel of Christ so that we truly speak and live for him in a way that clearly communicates to our age.”
One of their best resources is an online academic journal titled ‘Themelios’.
“Themelios is an international evangelical theological journal that expounds and defends the historic Christian faith. Its primary audience is theological students and pastors, though scholars read it as well.”
Check it out here!
A Brief Outline of the ‘Apology’ by Tertullian
Part 1: Chapters 1-9
In these chapters Tertullian argues that the experienced hatred of Christians is unjust, moreover that the judicial procedures involving persecution of Christians is unjust, seeing that the first accusation is simply bearing the Christian name. Tertullian then argues on account of Christian blamelessness and raises questions regarding the origin of laws that permit Christian persecution (An argument from Antiquity, “consider your roots, rulers”). He states that Christians are persecuted on ungrounded charges, and to search for the truth among rumors. Lastly, he gives an eternal perspective, ‘we are all men’.
Part 2: Chapters 10-16
These chapters are dedicated to refuting the accusation of sacrilege and treason, why worship pagan gods who are made from the dead? The insufficiency of such a religion is evident. This is why pagans must ‘prostitute their gods!’ Even when one reviews the ‘sacred rites’, the author argues, “Your gods have more to complain of you than of Christians.” There are no grounds for comparison when one looks at the offense of the cross, and the worship of other shapes.
Part 3: Chapters 17-23
Tertullian argues that there is only one true God; the Christian object of worship. This God reveals himself in the scriptures. The antiquity and majesty of the scriptures point to his Glory. But His glory is revealed even more fully in Christ: where God (divinity) and man (humanity) unite. Tertullian ends this section speaking of angels and demons, the proof of facts in spiritual matters, and the truth of Christ
Part 4: Chapters 18-35
Tertullian’s writing shouts, ‘your gods do not exist, your gods are unworthy!’ The Christian God is the dispenser of kingdoms! While Christians refuse to give in, the pagans fear amounts to hatred. It is in this section that Tertullian expounds upon the second ground of accusation; ‘treason against Caesar’. Claiming to the pagans, ‘you search for safety in Caesar’. A Christians safety is found in the one true God. In fact Christians even pray for Caesar and a delayed ending for Rome, because it is their God who appoints all things! While Caesar might be lord, he is not Lord. This is why Christians will pay no vain homage to Caesar.
Part 5: Chapters 36-50
In the last section Tertullian paints a picture of true Christianity, ‘we treat all men the same’, he argues, ‘we even love our enemies!’ He argues that there is nothing wrong with Christians rejecting what pleases pagans, and pagans rejecting Christian delights. He asks, what wrong have Christians done, ‘See how we love one another?’ He then explains that the sources of trouble are to be found in pagan human affairs. Christians are being charged on grounds of the name not wrong deed, Christians are without crime! Tertullian then issues a challenge to review the charges against Christianity based on reality, not on the speculations of poets and philosophers. But, what ever the end may be, Christians would rather be condemned that apostatize from God. In fact, he argues that in continuing to persecute Christians, the pagans must understand that ‘the blood of Christians is seed!’
Tertullian’s Argument
Tertullian’s Apology is formally addressed to the ‘rulers of the roman empire’. The Apology is primarily an account of the Christian experience of hatred and injustice at the hands of the Romans. Tertullian strives in his argumentation to demonstrate the absurdity of pagan religions in comparison to the truths of Christianity.
The Apology is well argued at most points. One of the purposes of Apology seems to be exposing the absurdity of pagan religions. Tertullian does this well. But his argumentation is not well balanced with a call to action in refuting the Roman governments cause for persecuting the Christians. While aggressively attacking the logic behind persecuting Christians, Tertullian takes a passive stance when it comes to action in ending this injustice. He basically ends the Apology like this, go ahead “kill us, torture us, condemn us, grind us to dust; your injustice is the proof that we are innocent.” Tertullian leans so hard on the divine providence of God in these situations of persecution that he presents the Romans as playing their ordained role in the drama of the early church. While this may be true from a ‘divine’ perspective it places Christians as passive targets of injustice from a human perspective, and empowers the Romans to continue justified in their hatred towards the church. Tertullian calls the pagan poets and philosophers ‘sublime speculators’, no doubt the Roman officials saw the Christians in the same light (this is also true of Tertullian in the section on spirit’s having wings). While is it true for Christians that “The oftener we (Christians) are mown down by you (pagans), the more in number we grow; the blood of Christians is seed.” (53) The implementation for action on the part of Christians seems lacking. This is illuminated by the escapism further heightened in the statement, “only one thing in this life greatly concerns us, and that is, to get quickly out of it.” (45)
Now, Tertullian’s Apology does have strengths, especially in regards to a model for Christians in civil affairs. While Tertullian argues in the same vain of ‘Jerusalem having nothing to do with Rome’, he well establishes that the essence of religion is voluntary worship not government alliance. In fact, it is mentioned that Christians render to Caesar what is his without paying vain homage like the pagans. Tertullian’s case is built upon the experiential evidence of ‘how the Christians love one another.’(42) This provides an excellent model of civil engagement, Christians “do not hesitate to share…earthly goods with one another.”(42) Tertullian then adds to his argument with a question grounded in experience, “who has ever suffered harm from our (Christian) assemblies?”(43).
It is important to note, Tertullian highlights that the unjust persecution of Christians is more explicit in a society that champions ‘freedom in religion’. He makes it quite clear that it is Christians, and Christian’s alone who are “forbidden to say anything in exculpation of themselves.”(2) Tertullian eloquently paints a picture of Roman officials fearing that the truth of Christianity (9), and the absurdity of their charges against Christians will somehow work against their own power in society. This is one of the strongest points of the Apology, Tertullian probes the minds of the Roman rulers exposing the logic behind their thoughts. In the end I feel that Tertullian had made a full exhibition of the Christian’s case for innocence and being mistreated on wrong grounds. He then asked the most poignant of questions, “Why, then, are, we not permitted an equal liberty.”(48) The answer could be found, I believe, in the profound statement, “truth and hatred come into our world together. As soon as truth appears, it is regarded as an enemy.” (9) This might be the only explanation that fits.
Dr. Daniel Akin has composed a series of thoughtful articles on expository preaching on the blog “Between the Times”. He writes, “We believe the church of the Lord Jesus Christ is at a critical point, especially in the Western cultural context. To be specific, there is a real and serious crisis in our pulpits today. The situation must be addressed if we are to experience a Great Commission Resurgence.”
Dr. Akin is a great preacher- in saying that I mean he is a great teacher. He presents the Bible clearly when he preaches. It is a great model for ‘pastor/teacher’. Read what he has to say below.
1. Mandate for Biblical Exposition, Part 1
2. Mandate for Biblical Exposition, Part 2
3. Mandate for Biblical Exposition, Part 3
4. Mandate for Biblical Exposition, Part 4
In a recent survey titled “What Americans Really Believe” by Dr. Rodney Stark (Baylor University Press, 2008) he concluded that ‘Megachurches are more than a mile wide and an inch deep’.
The survey found that “Even with congregations of more than 1,000 members, the Baylor Religion Survey found that megachurches surprisingly are more intimate communities than small congregations of less than 100 members. Megachurch growth is mostly due to their members, who tend to witness to their friends, bringing them into the group, and witness to strangers, much more often than members of small churches”
“When compared to small congregations, the survey found that megachurch members display a higher level of personal commitment by attending services and a Bible study group and tithing. These people are as interested in evil and sin as anybody in any of the churches. Their levels of satisfaction are high, their volunteerism in community service is very high and their outreach efforts are absolutely phenomenal.”
“I’ve heard stories when you go to some of the megachurches that you have to get tickets and parking like it’s a football game,” said Dr. Carson Mencken, professor of sociology at Baylor. “You go to a football game, you sit next to people you don’t know very well, and so I figured that’s exactly what megachurches are going to be like. The survey reveals the megachurches are not like that at all. These people do know each other, and they’re networked into the church through their friends and friends of friends.”
This survey is interesting in light of the predictions that Mark Driscoll argued about the emerging generations in his book “Confessions of a Reformission Rev.”;
“Emerging and missional churches will include more mega-churches than ever, and they will be both attractional and missional in the philosophy of ministry. If a church is truly missional, it may become a mega-church for three reasons: (1) the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ is powerful and effective, (2) a truly outward-focused missional church will experience conversion growth, and (3) a truly missional church has such a burning desire for cultural transformation that it must grow large enough to serve a whole city.”
“Emerging generations indeed feel more comfortable in larger churches. This information runs contrary to much of the popular teaching today, which asserts that the future of the church will be house churches and smaller church communities. I believe that the megachurch phenomenon is not over but just beginning, that the ‘experts’ are simply wrong, and that the future trend will be toward the extremes of very small and very large churches.” (Pages 30-31)
With all that said, I have one question…where do these finding’s fit in the overall discussion of Biblical Ecclesiology? I think Dr. John Hammett has made some good suggestions in his book “Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches” on his concerns with the ‘changing landscape’ of the church.
Any thoughts?
Matt Capps 