Link-o-Maniacs….
Matthew Paul Turner calls out John Piper, in a manner that is getting him grilled in the comments section of his own post, at Boars' Head Tavern and probably here and elsewhere on the web (FWIW, whatever good points Turner made got lost in his sarcasm)….
Dave Ingland on Christian celebrity.
Doug at Life Together posts an excerpt from John Piper on why kids are legalists who need the gospel.
D.J. Chuang on how an unfortunate conflict between Christians played itself out in social media.
Craig Groeschel says to pastors, prepare for attacks.
Groeschel interviewed by CNN about online church.
Trevin Wax critiques John Frame's review of Michael Horton's Christless Christianity.
Wax also gives Jim Belcher an opportunity to respond to (TR) critics of his book Deep Church.
Kevin DeYoung tells us if God can know everything and still give us free will.
Christianity Today's David Neff reviews Jeffery Sheler's new biography on Rick Warren (HT: Gospel Coalition).
A word from J.I. Packer on the ESV Study Bible.
Finally, I'll leave it to the pastors here to tell us if God would indeed run Windows XP 
Re: the Piper video telling parents to preach the Gospel to their little legalists
Much as I like John Piper, this area is my BIG “pet peeve” amongst the TR (Truly Reformed). Having spent time in several Reformed churches, this is one area that ALWAYS bothered me on Sunday mornings. The Gospel is a great big “catch-all” term to the TR. Pastors shunned using “life applications” and instead preached that merely “embracing the Gospel” would somehow power adults and children to live like Christ. “Don’t study the Scriptures to figure out what God wants, that’s legalism. Study the Scriptures to know the Gopspel and be changed by the Gospel!” Pastors in these churches dislike preaching “applications” — something I always craved but rarely received. Instead it was a passive, powerless Christianity. It was always discomforting to me to sit under these messages week after week because I believe that it is the Word of God trusted and applied which causes a person to grow in faith and obedience, in conjunction with the Spirit who works in us. Not just merely “believing the Gospel” and that somehow makes you Christlike. “God is more interested in what you believe than what you do for Him.” But it’s NOT either/or. Both are important — what you believe should show itself up in what you DO. After all, why are we judged by our works in Matthew 25:31-36 if not for that premise? Works don’t save us, obedience doesn’t save us, but if true saving belief is there, the obedience will be there too.
A Christian who isn’t actively following Christ as outlined in the Scriptures isn’t a Christian at all, no matter how much they “believe the Gospel.” And I don’t spend all my time teaching my kids to “believe the Gospel;” I teach them the Scriptures and in those Scriptures IS the Gospel (ie: repent of your sins and turn to Christ), along with countless pages of exhortations and guidelines for living: our owner’s manual. \
I say: Teach the Scriptures verse by verse and see lives changed!! Simple but powerful.
Pet peeve rant over…
I think that Christian celebrity (worship) is a big part of what has made the church so weak in this generation. That, and being used (willingly) by the Republican party (and as a political pet) may be the two biggest downfalls of the church in this last 30 years. Jesus said that his kingdom was not of this world but the church seems to court the world like it has something to offer.
While I agree with the beloved ones sentiments…if I ever have Turner in my sights I’ll punch him in his dirty little mouth.
http://www.crossway.org/blog/2009/11/esv-study-bible-a-word-from-j-i-packer/
Methinks Matthew Turner was looking for a bit of publicity. He’s definitely going to stir some up with that post.
Piper certainly isn’t infallible, but I sincerely doubt Turner would have said that straight to the man’s face. A little decency & respect is in order.
It seems like it should be obvious, but I never put it all together that JI Packer would read every word of the ESV Study Bible notes & articles. That’s pretty comprehensive.
How much do I like the ESVSB? It’s not even my preferred translation, and I regularly recommend it as the best study bible I’ve ever seen.
(Now if only they would come out with a version in the NKJV…)
Thanks for the link.
@Michael: Punch me in my dirty mouth? You just gave me something to Twitter about, and you also prove why the post about Piper, though not perfect, was needed.
Sure, the post was sarcastic. But sarcasm was the point. When Piper said that God sent the tornado on purpose because of the Lutheran decision to allow clergy who were openly homosexual, he wasn’t being sarcastic. Which is meaner? He’s speaking on behalf of God. I’m just poking fun at Piper.
So, if you ever see me, Michael, punch me. Your “fear tactic” won’t keep me from speaking my point of view.
Again, thanks to BrianD for the link/mention.
Peace.
mpt
MPT can be slippery so it might be hard punch him in the face. I guess you did a good job trying to punch him in the gut by leaving a hurtful comment. I guess I would do the same thing, it is less bloody.
@Tim: methinks MPT would have said that to his face. he says crap to my face all the time.
@Michael: silly rabbit… tricks are for… well… i got nothin’. you’re special.
mpt,
When you have contributed the body of work and character that Piper has to the Body of Christ maybe…maybe you could speak of an beloved brother the way you have.
I have disagreed with Piper in the past…but I will not slander or mock someone who has given so much to so many just for sport and amusement.
Jenni -
LOL.
MPT, Kyle, & Jenni…welcome to the Phoenix Preacher.
The weird thing is Piper is NOT a cold-hearted, stereo-typical Calvinist. He is one of the most gentle, loving, grace-giving preachers alive…and I’m no Calvinist.
Mpt - you’ll get a little pub for your article, but your attack was unfair, unwaranted, and mean-spirited.
You couldn’t have said it any better “mpt”
In other news, I want to come out of the closet: soccer is a great, great sport.
Also, I like women
Back to your impromptly scheduled debate
I am SO confused!!!
Isn’t Michael doing the EXACT same thing he’s all bitter at MPT for doing????
Ummmm hello, Pot, meet Kettle.
@Michael - Would you reconsider if MPT wiped his mouth clean? But seriously, I’m interested in learning about this latest Pastoral technique of clocking somebody you don’t agree with. Does the congregation get to reciprocate? Do they get to bum rush the Pastor and give him a good stomping when they feel like it?
Just asking.
@Tim: thanks! i often invite myself to parties.
oh… and we had a dog named “Phoenix”. that had nothing to do with anything… just thought i’d let y’all know.
@ Michael - Are we only beloved brothers when we have “contributed the body of work and character that Piper has”? Also that would be libel, not slander, though since it was a work of satire I think MPT is off the hook.
In any case, what you did might be rightly called assault. Isn’t that worse coming from a beloved brother to a beloved brother?
Michael,
Whatever good points you may have made just got lost in your threat.
That was an inappropriate statement and I repent of it.
My apology.
I will not repent of believing that the way Piper was mocked and misrepresented was as wicked as my wanting to defend Piper unrighteously.
Glad to see we’ve picked up several new…”witty”…commentators.
@Michael: fair enough. i like your avatar. it’s very pretty.
this is going to be an entertaining day, sorry I’ll miss it. Welcome to all the visitors and new posters. After this settles down please stick around and interact. it would be nice to hear your minds and hearts
peace,
( | o )=====:::
I’m starting a campfire, we’ll sit in a circle, hold hands and sing …
kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya
C’mon Michael, MPT, join in.
are we all really still talking about this?
By the way…if you knew Piper you’d know that he would have been the first to rebuke me…
well, hi everyone
estes….name sounds familiar………hmmmmmm
roche……. assault?? oh come now, you obviously haven’t been around the PP much…. loosen up some, huh?
If we really want to push TULIP double predestination as far as we can than no one should really be upset with MPT because he was just acting out what God predestined him to do from before time. It isn’t MPT’s fault that Piper writes ridiculous things on twitter about porn and addiction that are not explained and worthy of satirical responses. Because clearly, in the end, this is just one big TULIP play of God’s glory and wrath.
@Michael: are you JP’s best friend? cuz that would be rad!
I know Matthew Paul Turner. There are some things I’m pretty sure about:
1) he would say the same thing to Piper’s face
2) Michael isn’t the first person to want to punch him in the mouth
3) he’s gotten pretty good at ducking punches in the mouth
MPT is worth reading. He has unique insights and good things to say. He’s not afraid of whacking the odd sacred cow when necessary, and, come on, sometime those sacred cows really do need to be whacked.
I thought I would mention an article I ran today addressing depression among church leaders. You might want to check it out.
http://morethancoping.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/tapped-out-pastors-job-can-easily-breed-depression/
sacred cows make great hamburger!
Jenni,
Not at all…but I have watched a man whose walk matches his talk.
Piper has chosen to live a very simple life among the people he leads and gives away most of his work for free.
He has not used what God has given him for personal profit or gain…and I respect that greatly.
Wow, so many visitors today. I will put the kettle on and make a pot of tea for everyone. Who’s bringing the cookies?
ph 4:11 And He Himself gave some [to be] apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,
…
Eph 4:14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting,
Eph 4:15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head–Christ–
Eph 4:16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.
seems to me that mpt was waaay more out of line commenting on Piper than MichaelN was in his reaction to same - dunno
Come on, the “Christformers” line was funny.
Let’s talk about Jesus, or debate whether I’ll turn the other cheek if I ever meet Michael.
Michael, do you live Nashville? Frothy Monkey at 2? I think that’s where the Reformers hang out.
In Piper’s Name,
mpt
Micheal, I think they are just trying to see who can get off the best one liner.
What you are saying is absilutely right, and I think they all know it.
It would seem that MPT has his own following. Welcome all to the PP!
Point of reference for PP newbies: This is Michael’s blog, and he’s a good guy.
Nothing wrong with taking on sacred cows, but it show some respect as you knock them!
-g,
you need a compensated saddle for that guitar…….
actually, sacred cows have way too much fat, even for hamburger!!!
Let me say first I think MPT is dead wrong in his sentiments regarding what Piper put up there. Michael…I know I can say that to him and debate it with him because he’s a decent enough guy to talk about things. You should try that rather than just say you want to hit him because he went a little over the line. Engage in discussion…don’t encourage violence.
James,
Agreed, I’m not impressed……….
Oy…if everyone is this stirred up about MPT’s Piper post…I sure hope you don’t go read his Olsteen post next…
Jason, Micheal repented and apologized.
mpt,
I think we both have an opportunity here to learn some humility and experience some growth among the brethren.
I’ve had to eat some of my words…you may want to consider if you would want to do likewise.
I’ve been known for having to repent when I cross the line.
A lot…
Consider whether the man you spoke of may deserve some respect…
I think it’s funny how some people are jumping all over MPT when he merely pointed out something that Piper said and then it is like all the Piperites came out swinging….
Even those that are supremely elevated say stupid/funny stuff sometimes…and that’s when you bring it out, have a good laugh and move on. I know Piper and I know he says crazy things at times… but even he could laugh at MPT’s post!
@ Centorian - Nope, first time over here and not the last. I’m a pretty loose guy ordinarily, but when people bring the smack talking to that level, I gotta say something. And I figured one place to start would be making sure that if we’re going to fling around words like slander we should at least know what we’re talking about.
Michael repented and MPT forgave so that’s all good.
@ Nonnie - I brought these peanut butter cookies. Hope no one is allergic.
Oh and Centorian. It’s Scott, or Mr. Roche if you’re nasty.
Jenn, you mean the O$teen po$t?
Satire is brilliant when done properly, but even then not everyone’s going to be on board because you’ll be skewering someone’s sacred cow.
That said, visitors, welcome to Phoenix Preacher. I second what Papias said. Michael is one of the best guys you will ever meet. He can be quite passionate, and opinionated, and also is willing to repent when he makes a mistake.
roche…… good to have you here……. the rules of engagment run all over the map here at times……… part of why I call this place home
scott,
I’m a last name kinda guy, nothing personal at all…….
and… you’re mispelling my name
@Michael: makes sense. i don’t disagree Piper is very respectable. i own MANY of his books and quote him on a regular basis… but i think if we can look past MPT over-the-top (but funny, IMHO) response, we can see social media has come around a bitten JP in the backside. What worse is it seems as if he has no clue about it.
JP’s tweet confused and even hurt a lot of people. some of us deal with hurt via sarcasm. MPT deals with it by doing the macarena. we all have our flaws.
Miehael, your 10:16….well done. I only hope others will respond in like.
The tea is on, Scott brought PB cookies, now let’s all sit down and have a a nice chat.
@Brian Yes, yes I did.
Come on, you have to admit- that Ol$teen concept alone is BRILLIANT
Kevin DeYoung’s article on whether or not God can know everything and give us free will is in my opinion one of the biggest wastes of cyberspace I have seen in a long time. Talk about an article that is full of false assumptions and flawed logic. Really, he should think the subject through before expressing his ignorance. Second thought that wouldn’t help because he thinks he has…
Jenn, I agree. I posted the link on last week’s Linkathon. Complete with $ in place of the s’s
JimB, your comment just might draw the Truly Reformed commenters here. Then we can have a real free-for-all
The JO post was much better, imo.
Dear Pot,
I think that, whether you try to name-drop someone you don’t actually know or not, your reaction to MPT’s (aka Kettle) post was a bit over the top. Ferreal. Move on. You disagree. You’ve let us know, but you weren’t near as funny in letting us know as was mpt in relation to Piper. Just sayin.
Sorry centorian, I’m a proper capitalization kind of guy. Old English major habits die hard.
I love it when new people show up and tell the regulars how to behave in their own backyard. LOL!
welcome
Jenni,
bought a larivee (L body) about 16 years ago…… still sounds better than my others…. gave it to my son a few years ago…..
I didn’t think Deyoung’s article was that bad. Nothing new for sure, but not a COMPLETE waste.
LOL!!!
Oh and while I’m not a pastor, I’d say that God probably runs something open source. Proprietary stuff is of the debbil (says the card carrying Mac fan).
@centorian - seriously… my favorite guitar BY FAR! if you wanna give another one away, i always have room
cent,
it’s a guitar synth so it needs this saddle
Wow, crazy discussion (re: Piper vs. MPT). It was a bit strong (even if Matthew was being tongue-in-cheek), but Piper was also being a bit cryptic. All in all, I’m convinced that lengthy discussions like this probably aren’t the best use of our time.
Jenni,
our son is the worship leader, so I get to hear it every Sunday… Rosewood back and sides, sitka top and some extensive inlay work on the headstock and fretboard. Sorry, I’ve given away two already and am about to give one of my Taylors to my daughter-in-law.
“I love it when new people show up and tell the regulars how to behave in their own backyard. LOL!”
I think it’s very cool, a splash of fresh water!
Nothing like having a huge mirror held up in the bright light of day!
hahahahaha
ok….I gotta get off here before I hurt myself laughing
Erunner, Steve Lopez at the L.A. Times did a piece today on PTSD, thought you might be interested.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez11-2009nov11,0,5663600.column
Jeff,
stick around, these discussion go on for days!
gotta go print some pix at Costco.
Thanks everyone for showing up and bringing joy
What I find amusing Gren is when new people show up at a place and then start telling everyone else who has already been there with established culture how to “behave properly”.
It’s like a bunch of missionaires just descended in the jungle and interupted dinner.
Usually it doesn’t stike me as so funny…but today it just does.
Jenni, I still don’t understand why all the “hurt” is out there about Piper’s tweet. I’m one of the folks who was squarely in the crosshairs of that tweet and I just went “yeah, that’s pretty much true” and went on my way with things. I know MPT a little from reading his writings on the blog but I think a lot of other folks who just despise Piper are stirring this up to be more than it really is at the core. MPT went way over the top and some folks are just using that to fan flames.
@Michael…way to do the right thing man. There’s not enough props given to the folks who can actually say they were wrong in the interwebz…
london,
agree. It is kinda funny….. like I said to roche, the rules of engagement run all over the map here…….
been fun, gotta go…………..
Jeff Goins, thanks for contributing to the discussion to let us know our discussion is a waste of time.
Having a good time today, some of the visitors are pretty funny. With all that’s been going on It’s kinda nice to have some light hearted banter.
I certainly don’t want Matthew Paul Turner being Jesus’ new PR director…his post reveals just how under-qualified he is for the job…what a twit!
I’m off to work for the rest of the day.
By the way I’m not a “Piperite”… I would be more properly boxed as a “Packerite”.
http://api.ning.com/files/2Dg9xbdUzf61lLmOmjoj8f7ZRX4zkemzf8cXoAH0-lI_/GreenBayPackers.jpg
These guys????
Thanks @Bryan Stupar. And that’s the point. We’re all twits. Jesus doesn’t NEED PR. He’s not a brand. It’s not meant to be serious. But you’re right; I can be a twit sometimes.
I need to figure out a way to say something bad about MPT, because the amount of comments and traffic that comes from him is amazing.
It could set records on my blog and have a ton of comments for a day or two.
funny how one comment sparked 80 more comments.
Much like the Osteen post and the anonymous comment and deadly viper comment.
Jesus needs new PR because people, myself included, love to talk about/argue over orthodoxy without doing any meaningful orthopraxy. Churches are full of talk but little praxis. Maybe if we didn’t just talk about love, grace and reconciliation Jesus’ PR would be fine.
Kyle…I know! I should write a post that says “Matthew Paul Turner is a weenie” for the title and just post a picture of the Oscar Meyer Weinermobile with his head photoshopped into the driver’s seat. I could multiply my blog traffic ten fold!
Michael’s sock in the jaw comment is nothing compared to when he has time to brace you out in print.
We need to think, perhaps, about what really constitutes ‘violence.’ I read mpt’s clever verbal smacking around of Piper as violent. I have to curb a similar tendency and I know when the skill gets out of hand.
But good stuff all… good hearts show up here… a lot!
BrianD really finds links worth reading (when my old browser lets me do so) thanks again
popular petulant poster protests proper Piper’s pummeling prurient pious p•rnsters provoking Phoenix Preacher’s promised punches
AB -
Perfect pontificating!
I personally feel that Piper can certainly come off as strong, and his convictions are lightyears beyond mine (and probably higher & holier too)…but IMO he’s a man of God attempting to live out the Gospel according to the dictates of his heart…that shouldn’t be wrong nor scoffed at. In a culture were strong convictions are being pawned off below wholesale, an inch/mile in that direction isn’t harmful.
MPT, BTW I would have posted my earlier words on your blog had there not been a comment moratorium.
@ Nate Nims good point.
So, tell me what kind of praxis you’re involved in. Love to hear stories of people living out their christianity in a way that makes a difference.
Tim,
WOW, we have a whole NEW gang here today…
new icon and pseudonyms…killer!
It’s like, Pheonixpreacher 2.0
wait…3.0
wait…4.0
wait…5.0
welcome everyone!
Right now being in seminary, I spend most of my time thinking about orthodoxy and wondering how it can turn into orthopraxy. However, I do try to pay attention to Matthew 25 as much as I can so I take a class at a prison, try to be involved in a number of charities and live in an intentional community with other seminarians.
If this thread about Piper and MPT has shown me one thing it would be that we do need to be in dialogue with one another on “orthodox” matters. I am not a TULIP person and I disagree a lot with Piper on socio-political matters and I think his words can and are dangerous at times, but I know that mine are too. So we should talk and debate and be satirical at times. But at the end of the day we have to be able to put our differences aside and try to do what Jesus did - be with the poor, the outcasts, the marginalized.
Seems to me that Jesus was just around sinners all day long. That included a lot more than the outcasts.
Wow….it is like a whole new gang in here. Although, it helps that mpt mentioned it on his twitter and the gang all followed
Still, nice to have new folks.
mpt…I’m in Nashville but haven’t been to Frothy Monkey yet. I still hang around the pagans and music wanna be’s at Bongo, and the kids from Belmont who talk real loudly about the ministry opportunity at Bongo. I’m the almost-40 mom that doesn’t fit in
Right…that’s what I thought you’d say. Usually people who use “big’ words like othropraxy aren’t really spending too much time living lives of being orthropraxists.
I know from experience that it’s much easier to think on these things than do them. Easier to write a check than roll up your sleeves, easier to learn theory than perform labor.
Check out this post by a guy named David Hayward. He’s a vineyard pastor in Canada. I think it really addresses the things you’re processing. Tell me what you think of it…
http://www.nakedpastor.com/archives/4113
You’re in the right place here if you want to dialogue on “orthodox” matters. I’m not a TULIP person either btw.
london…I think you would like our fellowship where I’m at right now. Instead of trying to start a lot of new ministries, we try to come alongside people who are already doing things (a shelter for families, a home for abused kids, aids help to world vision and sweet sleep). I’ve been really pleased to see some of the “mission” work of the church…fixing up buildings, cooking meals. Sometimes folks just need the suggestion and the outlet and then they are excited to get involved in hands on helping people in the name of the Lord.
I probably would like it! I like the idea of not duplicating efforts very much. I think it’s really awesome if you’re doing it with groups that aren’t christians especially!
I like Nate Nims for some reason. Sometimes I just get a “feel” for people who post on here. I think he’s working through some of the same stuff I’ve been trying to work through the last couple years. Trying to find a balance between learning the word and doing the word if you will. It’s tough when you’re whole world is the church.
I think that’s one major advantage I have right now with the weirda** way I’m doing church. I don’t have a whole church of people in town that I can cajole into doing good deeds. I gotta figure it out on my own and cajole all kinds of random people.
I hate it and I love it at the same time.
I’m going through a season of examining what I think about money, affluence, and community. Just today, my very good friend who is making 6 figure income told me that it “wasn’t that big” that we (our little group here) is feeding 8 families this Thanksgiving. It really ticked me off!! WTH?? No…it’s not that big a deal if you’re working and making a crap load of money. But, people in our group are either not working, or are working “normal” jobs and barely getting by. For us, 8 families is alot right now.
What irked me about it was the flippancy of it. The reality that I know full well, in the grand scheme of things, no, 8 families is not that many. But…it’s 8 families that wouldn’t have otherwise had meals.
and maybe it irked me more because I’m sure that I’ve had that same exact tone and that same exact effect of belittling what someone was doing and how much that was costing them.
What I’m finding is that it’s not really the ability to write the big check that brings satisfaction (although, that’s nice too) it’s the getting out in the community, talking to people, asking for help (which I HATE more than anything except brocolli), and finding folks that need help.
Yesterday I went to the elem school where I grew up. Talked with the counselor who told me that he “believed in the Holy Spirit” and that He sends people where they should go, because he sees it happening all the time at the school. They have a need and people like me just show up and say “hey, we want to help you”. It was a pretty humbling experience to have someone in a public school tell me that and say I (we) were the answer to their prayers. Don’t get that experience from thinking about missional living, or writing a check.
Rambling….
@ Nate Nims
Can I ask you another question? I’ll refrain from poking ya with a stick this time. honest
What stops you from doing some of those “praxial” things now? Absolutely serious question. I do this weird thing where I’m kinda 80% involved in a church in another state and 20% involved in a church here locally.
I asked the same question of someone around your age at the 80% church and got no answer. I think maybe you can articulate it well though. So, what is it that keeps you from today going out and finding something to be involved in? Is it like Sarah said, the idea that you’d have to start something new? Is it the idea that in order to do anything of significance it has to be big?
I’m NOT trying to trap or embarrass you I swear. I’m truly trying to figure it out in my own head and to also understand what’s going on in the heads of the folks I’m around.
Ideas??
A Believer is back!
My guess is it’s a big deal to those 8 families that will be receiving a Thanksgiving meal.
jlo, Thank you for linking that article. Steve Lopez was played by Robert Downey Jr. in the movie “The Soloist.” That was a fact based movie addressing the topic of schizophrenia. I’m happy to see him still active and having written the article. God bless!
yeah, I’m sure it is.
I know she didn’t mean it in the way I took it, I know she’s just getting into the whole “make a difference” mode. Starting to understand that accumulation of thigs is not all it’s cracked up to be. Once you’ve turned that corner and start seeing all the need there is in the world, I think you start thinking on a bigger scale.
This gal is totally into this project, putting money into it, getting her co-workers involved as a work related team.
And yeah…8 families is not alot in the grand scheme of things. But, getting people with not alot of disposible income to be committed to feeding 8 other families is a big deal.
I’m really not sure why it irked me so much. Maybe cause it feels so hard to break through the personal barriers of being broke (well, not really) and asking people who are working for money (I feel like a beggar) Then having to get over the personal shyness and being the one in charge of finding families. So to me, each step of the thing feels like a big deal.
Man, I’m talkive today…sorry…
Erunner, I started to follow his column when he started writing about Nathanial Ayers, the story was very compelling. It was really cool to see it printed in book form and then a movie.
Is anyone really addicted to porn? Put a blow torch in their face; they will turn off the computer. IF they believe its real. - Piper’s Tweet.
If he had said that to my face, I would have punched him in the mouth… Twice.
jlo, I see so many homeless folks in our area and I always wonder how many of them might be Schizophrenic. I link to a PBS special on my blog that shows how our mental health system is a huge mess and how easy it is for people to get lost in the system. I’m glad to see so many fighting the stigma that is part and parcel so often of mental illness. If you’re interested here is the link. You are able to view the special at your leisure. God bless!
http://www.mindsontheedge.org/watch/
Yeah, that tweet was totally bizzare.
But I think that Turner’s response to it was rude, disrespectful and generally sophmoric. He ought to be sat in the corner for a time out.
Totally not impressed by his writing or his attitude. Makes me want to stand up for Piper even though I think the orginial tweet was goofy.
Does explain the sudden flitting in of his tweeter buddies and their just as sudden exit though.
What ever happened to “respect your elders”??
I found MPT’s comments on Piper sophomoric at best. Piper is a person ans people error. When any of us stands up for what is right and are willing to go to jail for it as Piper has done maybe we can comment a little stronger.
Most of us just want to get along and live happy ever after as good Christians should.
Oh some of you need to stop lying, cheating, stealing, living with your girl friend/significant other…
I didn’t say it Jesus did. I’m still struggling.
Thanks Piper I often need my eyes seared.
Erunner, thanks for the link, will listen to it this evening when the house is quite.
My husband and I have spent many evenings on the streets of Hollywood ministering to the homeless and many of them have some form of mental illness.
london, keep talking - you’re exhorting us to wake up and not do everything by committee
I think that’s the first time EVER someone on PP has asked me to keep talking.
I process stuff by writing…not sure if I’m exhorting anyone as much as I’m trying to sort it out in my own head.
That is so cool, London. God’s multiplied blessings as you serve Him in this way!
So, who are all of these new people? Any of you Lutheran?
@London…not all of MPT’s “tweeter buddies” have left. I just didn’t see where your postings mandated a response to let you know we were still here.
Likewise Jason!
london,”not sure if I’m exhorting anyone” you’re right you weren’t exhorting. But what you were processing had an exhortative affect up here.
All the stuff that I wrote above are things that I do now. Currently I am involved in a couple Christmas present projects as well as a fundraiser for school teachers in Liberia. On top of that I go to Northern State prison every week for a class with inmates and have fellowship with them. Then with my roommates we have an intentional community at our seminary, which for us means that we do a lot of meals together as a group as well as inviting others to fellowship with us. I am also involved with an environmental activism group, an LGBTQ group and the Beatitudes society.
See…I knew there was a reason I liked Nate.
Good for you then. Glad to be wrong in my snarky remark about people who use big words. You are a praxistic guy after all.
So, any ideas about what it is that causes folks to not want to do any of those things? Do you find that too or in your environment at seminary is it the norm to be actively involved?
I think the United States is a highly individualistic and segmented culture. We like to leave church at church, work at work, family at home and so on. Because our lives are so segmented and divided we only think to give food to a food bank when your church sponsors one. When we aren’t confronted by something we forget about it, especially if it is something that is not part of our norm. For me, living in community and being involved in charity/social work is a norm, but for others its not.
Yeah, I think you’re right in some ways.
But, what’s the seminary teaching you guys, or better yet, what are you teaching the seminary about how to resolve that in the future?
Seems that there’s quite a few “grass roots” level missional churches and movements outside of church that are beginning to get a handle on it. I’m curious about how the intituitional education system is doing.
My school, Drew, does a lot in the vast majority of the courses, to talk about social justice issues and concerns. Most of the professors remind us that we are to do something with our knowledge and think about our neighbors. And a lot of what we do, because of this, is grass roots. We wanted an environmental group so we started one, we needed an LGBTQ group so we started one, we wanted to do an intentional community and so we did.
what is “an LGBTQ group”?
That’s cool Nate
sounds like your getting a good education then.
What are you planning on doing with it?
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer
Nate,
Really??? What seminary do you attend? Do you really have that many LGBTQs on campus to form a group?
I go to Drew Theological Seminary in New Jersey. Many people in the group are allies but we do have a number of LGBTQ persons that are in various degree programs in the seminary and the graduate division of religion as well as the undergraduate school here too.
Right now I am finishing up my third and final year at Drew in the mDiv program. Post Drew I will be moving into parish ministry.
It’s going to be interesting to see which of the visitors stick and which ones where just a flash in the pan.
…or a nice divergence from our normal (well maybe not normal
) discussions.
Nate-
Is that a Lutheran Seminary?
PN -
http://www.drew.edu/theo.aspx
United Methodist.
And yikes…its waaaaay on the other side of the spectrum than I am.
Timbo-
Thanks…I saw that, I was just having some fun with MLD
You know how ‘ecumenical’ those Lutherans are 
I do appreciate the guidance, though… very kind of you.
Ohhh, Michael…..
Please Note,
I was originally going to ask him if it was an ELCA school, just to take a jab at our own ’separated brethern’ - that was your old tribe wasn’t it?
I guess we have discussed gay & lesbian clergy - now we can add transgender to the list.
Nate,
Welcome aboard!
Just curious — were you raised UM?
So Nate,
What do you guys tell folks your age who are christians but aren’t in seminary about social justice etc. Say there’s a group of relatively new christians that haven’t ever been involved in anything other than taking care of their own needs.
Do you guys ever hang out with folks away from the seminary and how do you get them involved in social justice activities?
You’re a trooper for hanging in there and answering all the questions btw. Thanks!
I’d ask the folks in my own group…but they some how can’t figure out how to use the computer to respond
I’m serious about the question though. How insular do you guys think you are as seminary students. 2 questions…
Hanna Rosin is on Morning Joe (MSNBC) alleging that the Prosperity Gospel has caused Christians to buy homes that they could not afford.
Hanna is a secular journalist who IMHO is usually pretty fair albeit sometimes she just does not get it. I exchanged some emails with her many years ago trying to help her see things the way we see them from the inside.
This site would be a great boon to Hanna, IMHO.
She just said on the air, her last comment, “Why are houses even being mentioned in church?”
Well, for one thing, Hanna, Mark 10:30.
london,
“social justice” is such a pukey, means nothing buzz word. Please define your use of the phrase.
Tell Hanna
That the Prosperity Gospel people did not have the power to approve billions upon billions of dollars worth of loans that EVERYONE knew could not be paid. It was idiot liberals and wickedly evil wealthy people who ‘conspired’ to wreck the American economy. Everyone knew they were doing it.
But Hanna is looking for another reason to help people hate Christians. Just modern day Neros looking for a scapegoat. Demonizing believers is popular sport that grows daily in our culture.
Hanna is about the fairest most reasonable secular reporter covering evangelicals that I have seen.
Frankly, I do not know how she does it, since in most non-believers who study it, Christianity induces a hysteric irrationality.
From Kevin DeYoung:
“But this is not so. Here’s why. If an omniscient God has foreknowledge as to my choice of waffles, than this knowledge must be of an event that is fixed and necessary.”
My limited foreknowledge told me that Kevin DeYoung would flatly dismiss free-will with a short simplistic description and without quoting or referencing a single Bible verse.
Classic.
Michael,
I got your back.
Maybe I can get a 90% discounted “BAMM!” T-shirt from Florida…
And bring my friend named after John Wesley… and make it entertaining and ironic.
Don’t think I could attend a seminary that didn’t teach a biblical theology
But what do I know I am a knuckle dragging fundamentalist when it comes to the bible!
Why would someone attend a seminary that didn’t teach biblical theology? Seems an awful waste of time.
I know more Poverty Gospel folk
…Horde their money for a nicer sweater, car, cellphone, shiny beads and trinkets, tithe 2.5% of their income or less, leave missionaries unfunded, when someone asks for their coat they say “no” instead of giving them their cloak as well, enjoy their cozy homes, paying as much for high-speed internet and cable t.v. in 1 month than missionaries in many countries make in 1 month, never tell others about Jesus,
never get their hands dirty reaching the lost in prisons, crisis pregnancy centers and overseas…
Some of these “poverty gospel” folk have as much money as the “prosperity gospel” people but horde their money like an insecure single mom or selfishly indulge themselves like a wanna-be gangsta in the inner city.
Do YOU personally know more generous wealthy folks or more “poverty-mentality” wealth horders?
I know more generous wealthy Christians personally, but I meet A LOT of incredibly selfish wealthy “poverty gospel” Christians who don’t honor God nor people with their wealth.
Just change the name from a seminary to an institute for social justice. That way it won’t be misleading
I do not have a problem with the Prosperity Gospel generally,
But IMHO scripture supports that wealth comes from a combination of hard work, ambition, frugality, common sense, occasional cleverness, following the leading of the Spirit, sound financial management, generosity, sovereign providence, and the confluence of seemingly random events.
I believe the prosperity gospel is a lie from the pit of hell. It distorts the true gospel of forgiveness of sin & the gift of new life found in the risen Son of God. It cheapens the glory of God and makes the Almighty a personal genie subject to the whims of the people who ought to be serving Him in gratitude and love.
But ask me again, and I’ll try not to be so ambiguous in future posts on the matter.
Tim
That was nicer than my response, but I figured I’d bite my tongue a little longer.
Look at all of you falling into the devil’s trap - since when did the gospel ever come with an adjective?
The adjective makes it a lie.
BD, your 6:14 post cheers me. I was concerned that we were wearing you out. If T.H. lets you down, he’ll find an old lady chasing him with a stick! Haven’t quite figured out what/how to pray for him, but I will…
MLD, how about ‘glorious?’
‘glorious’ is a limiting description - it would mean that the best the gospel could be is glorious and no better.
What’s better than “glorious?”
Besides, was Paul limiting it in 1 Timothy 1:11?
The prosperity gospel was spawned by those claiming to take the kingdom by violence - interesting insights in this article:
http://apostasyalert.org/REFLECTIONS/kingdom_violence.htm
Question:
Last night I was pondering the scripture, “as much as it is possible, be at peace with others.” (I often forget the “as much as it is possible” part, but, I guess it’s in there too.) So my question is this:
In your learned opinions, how do we reconcile this statement of Paul’s with his other remark in Phil. 4:2 in which he admonishes Euodia and Syntyche to “settle their differences?” Or, more to the point, how far should disputing Christians go to achieve peace? At what point should both sides “agree to stay at war” and leave it that way? Should two warring Christians ever leave unforgiveness and conflict as the “status quo”? At what point does a dispute between believers reach the point of no return and an icy chill settles in which both regard the other as “unbelievers”?
….
PS: On a completely unrelated note, I want to thank everyone who has prayed for my teenage son. By God’s grace he has come back to Christ!! He is willingly going to church now (thank you-thank you-thank you God!) and is exhibiting interest in the things of God once more. He has become sweet again and has even been kind to his sister. PLEASE pray it continues. I am so incredibly thankful for this turn of events in his life. Thank you all for the prayers in this!!
~~holly
Holly, I think there are situations where we simply have to go separate ways. That has happened here on the blog. It does not necessarily mean we consider the other as an unbeliever, but that the conflict simply can’t be resolved. Both parties believe firmly in their position. There is room for that and I think can be done with a measure of grace.
I have some in my life I have had to do that with…we simply have had to walk away from our friendship. I do not doubt their salvation, but I see things too differently to fellowship without conflict.
We still are called to walk in as much peace as we can…by the grace of God. As I said, if we still have to walk away in disagreement we should do so with humility and not ill-will. That’s tough to do sometimes.
Holly, First off, I want to praise God with you for your son! Great news.
Secondly, I have to agree with Sarah, that there are times to try and resove conflict, and then there are times to walk away. In that case, the conflict may be unresolved without referring to each other as unbelievers.
We can agree to disagree agreeably. Or if that cannot happen, then walking away from the conflict and the other person’s sphere of influence is perfectly acceptable.
Hope that helps. I can use a personal example if needed.
It depends on the nature of the dispute.
If the “warring” is about secondary doctrines we may not be able to worship together, but we can and should recognize our fellowship in Christ.
If the dispute is over unrepentant sin that has wounded deeply and there is no movement toward confession and repentance, then separation may be necessary and advisable.
There are people in this world I will be “at war” with till the day I die unless they follow biblical standards of repentance and reconciliation.
But you knew that….
I think the Apostle Paul was a good example when he kicked John Mark out of the group. He and Barnabas had a huge disagreement and went their own ways - and I don’t think that it was a pretty as most people would like us to think.
In other words, I doubt that they gave each other a ‘holy kiss’ and went their way.
Holly,” At what point does a dispute between believers reach the point of no return and an icy chill settles in which both regard the other as “unbelievers”?”
no answers, but FWIW:
speaking strictly from the woman’s side of the fence, it is very difficult for us - IMO - to leave things unresolved… we seem to have a drive to understand and be understood by those we interract with - the more important the issue, the stronger the drive…
following the thoughts of many good men and women of God here has helped me realize that I need to look deeper when reading the Epistles, particularly Paul’s. They can be very situational and address the intent more than the literal, ie our hats
am blessed your posts, they are so honest and encouraging
“the contention became so sharp that they parted from one another” NKJV
“Their disagreement over this was so sharp that they separated” NLT
“They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company” NIV
the Darby is kind of funny
“There arose therefore very warm feeling, so that they separated from one another”
Nate:
At first when you said “Drew” I thought you were thinking about me. As a life long follower of Jesus Christ who participates and feels strongly about social issues I will give you a warning about social issues;
Do not replace the Gospel with social issues. A follower of Jesus does the works of a sheep and not a goat because he or she is a follower of Jesus. However, focusing in on social issues, while good, is a road paved away from Jesus and God’s mercy and grace shown to the world in Him.
Question: If men were all to suddenly become “green” and lower our carbon output would the world be saved? No! Just a bit cleaner for the arrival the second coming of Jesus.
ahh me: **I** am blessed **by** your posts - what I meant to say
Papias…”very warm feeling” ha! That’s brilliant.
Thanks for your input everyone.
I see your point….but, that isn’t God’s highest, though, is it? Wouldn’t His highest choice be reconciliation?
Two people who are just seeing things completely different and both seem convinced in their own minds and are as inflexible as flint– how to get them to reconcile? It isn’t possible, is it?
How can two Christians stay in a state of utter disagreement without hatred and spite?
You opened my eyes today to the idea that it is possible for two Christians to hate each other and be unwilling to reconcile their differences – I must be living in Pollyanna land again but honestly, it never occurred to me that this might be an acceptable state between believers. So, should peace still be worked toward (“see peace and pursue it”) or given up on as unfruitful use of time, knowing we are accountable for our time to God?
Yes, Papias, please give me a personal example. You too, Sarah, if you don’t mind. Thanks so much!
Michael, is it ever OK to be “at war” with another believer? I’m not neccesarily referring to the situation I know you are referring to, but asking as a general question. What does “being at war’ consist of? Is there a place for that mentality in the Church? I’m asking honestly.
Also, one thing I learned in the Reformed church is that we may think another person’s repentance hasn’t gone far enough for our liking, yet in God’s eyes and estimation the person has done what they could. And in their heart before God, they feel they *did* try to make amends and repent. How do we as Christians seeking peace deal with those differences of perceptions? One person may be waiting for repentance and apologies to occur when the other person feels before God that they have done what they could to make amends and repented before God of any mistakes.
This could be applied to Ted Haggard as well…. how do we as outsiders know his repentance wasn’t acceptable in God’s eyes? How do we ever know the depths of someone else’s repentance and efforts to make amends? Can we sit in judgment of that, rightfully?
No fireballs please, I’m just asking questions in the interest of trying to understand God’s heart on this whole concept as well as playing devil’s advocate in parts.
Holly, you said: “You opened my eyes today to the idea that it is possible for two Christians to hate each other and be unwilling to reconcile their differences” I don’t think any of us said that we have to be hating each other to be at different opinions. There is room in the faith to have a difference and go away at peace.
I have friends who are very liberal in their stance politically and socially, I frustrate them and they frustrate me. We don’t glorify God in our interactions…we end up always in debates. It is better we simply go our ways and seek to honor God as we are called. I have no hatred for them and no question of their salvation, but we simply disagree on other issues.
I have other friends who have stances on homosexuality that I do not agree with. Some friends I can remain in fellowship with because we are able to table that discussion, but others insist that I come to their way of thinking and I simply cannot. Again, I do not hate them, but I cannot fellowship with them.
Warring…yes, I think there are times. There are believers who are abusive…they need to be warred against. Warred against in prayer that they would repent, and warred against physically in doing what can be done to stop their abuse.
The fact is we simply will not be friends or in wonderful relationship with every person we know, believer or not. That does not mean we have to hate them or banish them, it simply means that we allow them to go their way.
On Haggard…I don’t think anyone has questioned his repentance. His restoration to the pulpit is what has been the question.
On God’s highest choice being reconciliation…sure, as long as that is first and foremost because each party is seeking to honor Him and only secondarily to be at peace with each other. The outflow should be peace with each other, but if we seek first the peace with each other, often I think we compromise in order to avoid conflict.
“Michael, is it ever OK to be “at war” with another believer? I’m not neccesarily referring to the situation I know you are referring to, but asking as a general question. What does “being at war’ consist of? Is there a place for that mentality in the Church? I’m asking honestly.”
It’s not only ok, at times it the only morally and biblically defensible position to take.
I won’t play the game…it is well known that I will be at war with the Heitzigs and Kestlers of this world until they make right what they have wronged.
It is a “cold war” now….I am weary and have no prompt from the Spirit to continue with either.
Some folks are called to stand for righteousness and to stand in the gap for those who can’t stand for themselves.
We will be doing so again very soon with yet another situation.
I dread it…it makes me physically ill to consider what I’ll have to go through.
Yet,I believe it’s the only righteous thing to do in front of God.
In all the situations I’ve confronted on the Phoenix Preacher there has not been one where if humility and contrition and the name of Christ had been the foremost considerations the situation could not have been resolved.
It hasn’t happened with the big boys yet….
However…every day here people from different traditions with deeply held dogmas set aside everything but the primacy of Christ to interact with each other as brethren.
It all depends on what kingdom you’re fighting for….
Holly, since you asked…
When I left CC, it was due to the pastor not giving a financial statement and the church not having true elders. But it also was due to how I was told no.
When I asked about the things above, I was then asked about my accountability to the church. Kind of like, “Never mind about the accountability things you are asking about from the church, what about YOUR accountability?”
That peeved me off. How dare you turn my questions around and use them on me! This happened again, after waiting for him to ask “the elders” what they thought about my request, I called him the next week. So he turned it around on me twice.
We never went back to the church.
But we did see them at a restaurant, and we were all cordial with each other. But the subject of church didn’t come up.
Thanks for your answer, Michael. I meant no harm in asking. I have a very kind-natured and “sweet’ personality (so I have been told) and it just never ocurred to me that anyone (a Christian) could be at war with another Christian. I guess it is possible. Then again I am not a man, and I know they see things differently!!
As women, speaking for myself, I like peace and hate it when anyone is mad at me. I will meet people more than 5/6 of the way in order to have peace, and will try to find any common ground possible. Only as a last resort could I ever regard someone in a “war” kind of way. I know guys have no qualms doing that! 
But it would kill me emotionally to do that, and I’d still work for peace even in that state. But, I am a girl and we all know girls aren’t tough!! 
Holly, if someone meant harm to your children my guess is that you would have no trouble going to war.
I’m a woman, but there are times to war for the sake of those who are without defense. The men bear the brunt of this often, but there are times that we need to step up. Many times I think we as women are called to do much “war” in prayer.
See MLD…I don’t always call for you guys to be girlie
This isn’t a gender related issue.
It is about truth and love for the God’s word and His people.
I love peace as well…the older I get the more so.
However, I will not compromise my principles to achieve it.
Ever.
Michael,”It hasn’t happened with the big boys yet….
However…every day here people from different traditions with deeply held dogmas set aside everything but the primacy of Christ to interact with each other as brethren.
It all depends on what kingdom you’re fighting for….”
sometimes I think that my finding this blog site was God’s gift to me
I can die in peace
Psalm…you’ve been a gift to this place and to me.
speaking of how tough girls are
we may not **like** to fight, but we’re tough - just read some of the ladies’ posts here - you’re tough in the best sense of the word IMO
and it’s true that men get battle weary, too - praying
Sarah, it’s the other way around - seeing solid, persevering faith in those coming along behind is such a blessing - I say the obvious here mostly - just re-inforcing it
Psalm 62
Amen to what Sarah said…you are a gift.
If someone threatened my children or tried to harm them, there is no end I wouldn’t go to, including murder in self-defense, to protect them. My children mean everything to me.
Other than that unlikely scenario, I try to live at peace with all people….I think separating from brethren should be a very last resort because of the witness it gives and the lack of unity it displays.
Should we solidly condemn a man who preaches the Gospel and is used of God to bring souls into the Kingdom? Whether that be Ted Haggard, Rick Warren, Skip Heitzig (you mentioned him, not me
), or anyone else? Can’t we applaud the good works on behalf of the Kingdom while objecting to other issues on righteousness sake, if need be? Can’t we thank God for using broken vessels like ourselves to preach His gospel? Do we throw out the whole ministry and the good it does on behalf of thousands of hungry souls because of objections regarding leadership style or past sin, etc? Can’t we extract the good and spit out the bones? And give thanks to God that in spite of it all, Christ is preached and souls are saved and discipled? Isn’t that the goal? It is mine.
“It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill. The latter do so in love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains. But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.” Phil 1:15-18
Pap………
I hate the restuarant scene with people whom I used to have fellowship with. It’s always so ackward………
so, on that note…
http://www.carhartt.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?storeId=10051&catalogId=10101&langId=-1&categoryId=20256&cm_mmc=Casale-_-wpb-_-USA_ROS-_-728×90
Holly, I’m just curious, but what do we then tell people like Michael or my brother who was one of the “ackerman 6″ who called for Skip to own what he had done to Pete and how he had used his position. Do we then tell these men that there was no point to their confronting sin, even in the pastor, because the pastor is preaching the Gospel?
There are many polished preachers whose lives are not holy. You have said that you have a great love for the Puritans…in your reading of them, what is your take? Do you think the great puritan writers would allow that we ignore when someone has abused the authority of the role of pastor simply because he is able to preach well?
I’m not real sure where this discussion is going…and I have to leave for the afternoon.
The discussion began in asking if there is ever reason to break fellowship with someone over conflict, and I think that was pretty clear from both Scripture and our relationships in life. To move on to seeking unity and avoiding conflict because there is some good…hmm. There is a lot that can be swept under that rug.
Anyway…good luck with this discussion y’all….I’m off to play with children.
unity for unity’s sake is always a dangerous ideal….. even amoung Christians
I’m off to Good News Club…..
Holly,”…applaud the good works on behalf of the Kingdom while objecting to other issues on righteousness sake, if need be? Can’t we thank God for using broken vessels like ourselves to preach His gospel? Do we throw out the whole ministry and the good it does on behalf of thousands of hungry souls because of objections regarding leadership style or past sin, etc? Can’t we extract the good and spit out the bones? And give thanks to God that in spite of it all, Christ is preached and souls are saved and discipled? Isn’t that the goal? It is mine.” good and Godly
the over-riding concern is not that the ‘wrong’ person is saving souls and discipling, but that the saved souls are in danger … what are they being fed? How much is their confidence in God tied up in their confidence in a charismatic personality? … things like that, I think.
off to do what I intended to do an hour and a half ago…
We’ve covered this ground a hundred times and I’m not compelled to do so again.
When the brethren have disputes it’s always the best and highest place to seek reconciliation.
When dealing with leadership, the Bible tells us that those who teach are held to a higher standard…and the loss of those standards is taking an inestimable toll on the church universal.
We’ve seen both the good and the bad here…the good is always preferable, bit it takes both parties being willing and open to the work of God in their hearts.
That is not always the case.
I’m very done now….
Sarah and everyone,
I am absolutely NOT going to be involved in a discussion about the whole Skip Heitzig/Pete Nelson affair. And honestly I am getting worried, I think we all need to stop talking about these people by name lest attention be drawn to this website by them!!
I will say I regret the whole fiasco even happened and I wish some things had been handled differently. I think many people were hurt when it all went down. I was sad by it all too, esp. that it got played out in the newspapers and caused God to be mocked. But do we discount a man’s ministry because of things that happened in the past, errors in domineering leadership style maybe? All I’m saying is, let’s view the whole picture. The Kingdom is being preached and that counts for a lot. God can, and will, deal with any unresolved issues. He is the One to whom we will ALL give an account.
I don’t want to talk about this anymore. PLEASE…let’s stop. I was only asking questions about the theology of reconcilation.
The Gospel is, necessarily, social and speaks to justice; if people want to say that my theology is not biblical I’m fine with that. I do not believe the bible is inherent and I will not believe that the God that made LGBTQ persons condemns them by making them non-heterosexual. If you want to condemn LGBTQ persons, because the bible says so, than you have to be pro-slavery, since that is clearly in both testaments and the understanding of slavery found in the text is much more closely related to what slavery is in our modern world than any biblical understanding of marriage, sexuality and sexual relations.
I would also say that Drew does reach out and attempt to reconcile people both within and beyond the seminary. Even if social justice is a buzz word.
@nate nims
I should warn you…there’s a few old, crochity guys here that will complain, make fun of you and dismaiss all your words and efforts at sharing the gospel, or doing any acts of kindness because you don’t use the list of “approved” words and theology. They think they are clever and have it all worked out in their heads. They are too set in their ways to actually ask people questions that lead to real understanding or conversation and instead make snarky comments designed to make people with different ideas look bad. They are too old to realize it just makes them look ridiculous.
So, I apologize ahead of time and hope your skin is thick enough to just ignore their rude posts and instead dialog with the people who don’t treat folks that way. There’s loads of them here.
Hopefully some day they will grow up a bit more….
.
My goodness. So many new posters and friends on this discussion!
I am listening to “Our Story” from Jenni’s website…. brave story, and an interesting application of the issue that is oft discussed here:
Welcome to the fun…..
infidelity in ministry…. and how they/the church handled it. Better resolution than most of the stories we are all too familiar with. “Our Story” is gutsy, real, transparent.
Nate,
“than you have to be pro-slavery, since that is clearly in both testaments and the understanding of slavery found in the text…”
I would challenge you to find a NT passage that is “pro” slavery or that tells me I need to be “pro” slavery. The passages are all descriptive and NOT prescriptive.
london,
that was one of the most condescending posts I’ve ever read.
If I disagree with someone, that causes me to be labeled as old?
Get off your high horse.
Nate,
“I do not believe the bible is inherent” - I will assume that you mean inerrant - so, could there be room for an adulterers club at the seminary? I have always been of the opinion that God MADE us men (or at the very least ME) to NOT be monogamous (and even gave me the wandering eye), otherwise he wouldn’t need to give us our own special commandment (right there in the top ten) to not do it - however, in my readings, he still holds me accountable.
Even though London has judged some of us to be rude and immature, I think even you understand the value of the discussion.
Descriptive or prescriptive, regardless, Paul tells salves to be obedient to their masters and tells one, that has escaped from bondage, to return to it. Slavery, as one person owning another, existed then as it does now. However, sexuality and marriage, as are now understood, are not found in the biblical text.
London,
That was really unnecessary and really demeaning.
Nate,
“However, sexuality and marriage, as are now understood, are not found in the biblical text.”
I agree 100% with this statement - the “as are now understood” is a very telling phrase.
Nate -
Regarding the question of slavery, it may be helpful to reread Philemon. It’s pretty apparent Paul was asking Philemon to grant Onesimus his freedom.
I have no idea what you mean by marriage & sexuality not being found in the Bible. The Bible has the absolute perfect description & prescription for what a marriage ought to be.
clicked send to early.
Perhaps we need to get back to the biblical understanding instead of “how we understand things today.”
As I pointed out earlier, perhaps our understanding today of adultery or love your neighbor doesn’t match up to the biblical statements - are they up for play now?
Nate said “sexuality and marriage, as are now understood, are not found in the biblical text.”
How do you look at passages like the following:?
“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery” Luke 16:18.
1 Cor 7
“For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.” Eph 5:23
“A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach;” 1 Tim 3:2
“if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination.” Titus 1:6
The Bible seems to teach a monogamus(sp?) relantionship between a man and a woman.
Perhaps you’re right Michael, but it sure beats what I was gonna write.
BTW - I’m not sure I had included you in my earlier welcome.
Nate, welcome to the PP.
FWIW, I was saved at a UMC in Houston, Texas. During a concert for the youth, the singer gave his testimony & invited us to receive Christ as Lord, and I was one who responded. Theologically, I’m far away from many in the UMC today, but I always had fond memories of the church in which I first started walking with the Lord.
Papi, I wasn’t thinking of you at all. I was specifically speaking of MLD and Steve Hopkins. I’m sick and tired of MLD’s snarky rude remarks to everyone who doesn’t agree with him and his ubiquitous Lutheranism. I’m sick of him saying things like social justice is “pukey”.
I like Nate and the stuff they are doing there. I’m sick of people like MLD with his crappy attitude chasing away people who have a different take on the way things are done.
Have you guys looked around lately at the people that hang out here? Where are the young voices, where are the people that ae representing what’s good in the future of the church? We chase them away without learning from them, and I think it’s a shame.
MLD’s reponse just ticked me off. This is as nice as I can be at the moment.
Steve Hopkins should just know better….
Polygamy is in the bible, but most of us don’t consider that a proper avenue for sexual/marital relations anymore. Concubines are also in the bible, but we often overlook them. There’s also the leverate law, but we want to forget about that. We also don’t want to remember that Paul says we should all be asexual like him and use marriage only when we cannot control the fire that burns within us. Moreover, homosexuality was not seen as an orientation in the ancient world, it was an action. The bible never speaks about 2 consenting persons of the same gender partnering or marrying. As a concept homosexuality is not found in the bible, especially lesbianism.
london,
It doesn’t matter if you were thinking of me or not. You came off as welcoming to the new person, at the cost “them”. Does anyone who disagree with a new person,(who doesn’t believe Inerrancy and is not open minded about LGBTR) automatically wrong?
I don’t think so.
Nate -
Polygamy & concubines are described, but never recommended. Regarding the Levirite law, we need to remember two things:
(1) It was a different covenant.
(2) It was culturally one of the only ways of physically providing for widows, who normally would have been discarded. Christianity has done more than any force on the planet to elevate the role of women.
I’m not sure why Paul’s recommendation is supposed to be a problem. Those who are gifted to be single ought not to feel pressured to get married. Those who are not gifted to be single ought not to feel guilt about getting married. Seems pretty simple to me.
And obviously homosexual relations are indeed found in the Bible, and consistently taught as sin. Just because our culture has changed on that point doesn’t mean the standard of God has. God has also condemned fornication, adultery, and casual divorce - yet those things are rampant today…even among the church. Our culture has changed its views of these acts, but God hasn’t. We ought not to approve that which God has declared to be sin.
I would like to have Nate interact with the Scriptures I pulled on marriage between a man and women.
And its not an exhaustive list at all.
London,
Just to show everyone how you twist the truth, I will copy my question, which was to you and not to Nate.
london, “social justice” is such a pukey, means nothing buzz word. Please define your use of the phrase.”
You will notice that I did not say any of the things you accused me of ABOUT social justice. I said that the term itself is in question and I asked YOU, not Nate to define your terms - which you did not do.
Also, I never mentioned anything about Lutheranism in my comments to Nate (again a mis statement on your part.)
Also, I challenge you to point out a ’snarky’ remark I made to Nate yesterday - or I will accept your apology.
Also, where do you come off saying that I am chasing Nate away? I made this comment to him earlier “Even though London has judged some of us to be rude and immature, I think even you understand the value of the discussion.”
I invited him to continue in discussion - and, even without your mothering, Nate seems to be holding his own here as exampled by his last 2 comments.
The issue here really is not sexuality inasmuch as it is a discussion on how one reads and uses the bible. I do not see the bible as a book of answers that I have to read and accept. The bible is a book that I wrestle with, a book that I struggle with and look to for guidance, but do not accept on face value alone. Scripture, along with reason, tradition and experience need to be used.
The bible says somethings about sexuality, but it says a lot more about carrying for widows, orphans, the poor, the marginalized, etc. I do not believe that God condemns LGBTQ persons for being sexual beings. If you do, OK. But I think you should consider the issue a little more closely and meet some LGBTQ persons in your churches, because they are there.
So why don’t we all just stop looking at the specks we see in each others spiritual eyes and look at the logs in our own.
Nate -
I see the Bible saying that Jesus Christ died for the homosexual just as much as He died for me. Everyone is a sinner, irrespective of what we feel how “big” or “little” the sin might be. Our sin required death, and that’s exactly what Jesus paid for us when He hung on the cross. In His resurrection, He offers us forgiveness & new life sheerly because of His love & grace.
That’s the message of the Bible…from Genesis to Revelation.
Are we changed as a result of that message? You bet. Fornicators ought not to fornicate any longer. Theives ought not to steal any longer. We ought to help the poor, visit the imprisoned, minister to the sick & much more. But all of that flows out of what Jesus already did for us on the cross & in His resurrection.
God condemns sin - ALL sin - because sin is to be condemned (and has already been condemned at the cross). But God has also provided the solution for that sin by sending His Son Christ Jesus.
All other interpretation of the Scripture flows from that starting point. If we don’t start there, we’ve missed the whole thing.
MLD I wrote what I wrote and I’ll not be giving an apology to you.
Anyone else that was offended because I didn’t specifically name you or Steve, then to them I apologize for not being specific enough so they thought I meant them. That is the only thing I regret.
Of course Nate can handle himself. That was obvious from the start.
There’s lots of smart young folks out there than can handle themselves well if given the chance. I’m optimistic about the future of the church because of the ways they see things and the fact they are out there doing something about it.
London,
Let me get this right…a fidelity to Scripture and the historic teachings of the church are a bad thing?
I enjoy MLD’s Lutheran ubiquity…he speaks for a very important and cherished part of the church universal.
Nate has correctly identified the issue…whether or not the Scriptures are authoritative or not.
He says no…and that is plain and simple heresy and the root of every heresy that ever was.
That ain’t going to be a long conversation….
Michael, no that’s not what I’m saying at all.
My irritation with MLD and Hoppy started before the discussion about scripture. It’s about attitude and condesension to those that don’t think the way they do.
MLD does it to people quite often as has been attested to many times here.
Hopkins, I just figure he’s in a grochy mood cause I know darn well he knows how to have a conversation with someone instead of making one line little digs at them. I’m sure he’ll have another cup of coffee and make a better attempt the next time.
Tim, is doing a great job of modeling the kind of conversation with someone he disagrees with and is new, and doesn’t know the “rules of engagement” in a community like this.
People can disagree all they want with what Nate, or anyone says, I don’t have issue with that. What I do have issue with is the automatic dismissal of people with new ideas that I saw displayed today.
I hope it is a long discussion because I like to see people from other sides of the table learn from each other.
ugm @ the PP addy btw
Nate,
One other thing, don’t feel like anyone is piling on. When the subject turns to infant baptism, the real presence in the supper or end times events, everyone piles on me - including London.
Also, as a Lutheran (sorry London) we take our own sin (the plank in our eye) very seriously. We are one of the few segments of Christianity that proclaim that we are simultaneously saints and sinners. That although we are 100% justified by Christ we are total sinners while we are on this earth. We also believe that to live out our baptism, that we must be continually in repentance. So, we do recognize our own sin and we should be repenting daily.
London,
If you look back you will see that I did not make any bad comments about his LGTQ comments.
london,
I am not dismissing Nate. To the contrary, he seems to be dismissing me.
When someone new comes on with their opinions set, and then cry foul that others don’t embrace their theology, it’s a self fulfilling prophecy.
time to go pick up the grand kids from school.
I’ve never said that the bible is not authoritative, only that it is one authority among others and is not inherent. If that makes me a heretic so be it.
And I’m fine with others saying that I am wrong about the bible and LGBTQ persons. You all are not the first people that I have had this conversation with. All I want to say, ultimately, is that sexuality, in and of itself, is not a sin. Yes, sexuality can and is used in sinful ways, but sexuality, as such, is not necessarily sinful.
I do not mean to dismiss persons, however, I do believe that the rejecting of LGBTQ persons is homophobic and sexist.
London,
ugm, too
Nate,
The word is “inerrant”
Ҧ Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,
nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”
(1 Corinthians 6:9–11 ESV)
If homosexuality is not a sin why is it listed here as something people had repented from?
there’s only one **old** person here and you have no idea how snarky and passive agressive I refrain from being…
I love MLD’s input BTW - almost never agree
I have my prejudices er.. strong, mindless beliefs to hand onto!
Nate -
How is the affirmation of homosexuality as a sin a rejection of those who practice it? It’s no different than calling an adulterer an adulterer because he/she committed adultery. The sin is still the sin. Yet God still invites all to come to Jesus through the cross for forgiveness & new life.
I’m a sinner, and yet God saved me…and is changing me more & more every day. Why wouldn’t we want to tell others they can experience the same thing through Christ Jesus?
Jesus had more to say about divorce than homosexuality.
Yet look at the divorce rate in the Bible Belt.
Yet in the Evangelical Church, one is protested in the streets while the other is an accepted norm.
I’ll give you three guesses why…
well, if I could ‘hand’ on my beliefs, I would… make that ‘hang’
why do they always blame old people for not recognizing inherent (smile) sexuality BTW - most of us have been there… we know Who created it, come to terms with it and, God willing, enjoyed it - it’s not the victims of aberrent manifestations of same that concern us; it is the manifestations themselves that, sadly, are a barometer of societal health… no Bible thumping just historical fact… whatever cause and effect you want to hang your mitred hat on.
pti,
“Yet in the Evangelical Church, one is protested in the streets while the other is an accepted norm.”
Are you saying that divorce is not sin?
I’ve never seen anyone protest divorce in the church.
Why is that, MLD?
…how many little ones are devastated by it?
Thank you for catching my misuse of words, spelling has never been my thing. Homosexuality is listed as a sin just like wearing mixed fibers is listed as one in other places, or women having short hair because nature says so. And sure, you can explain everything away and say that was just part of the old covenant and we truly know better know because we have Jesus, but I don’t buy it.
It is one thing to say that an action is a sin, it is another thing to say that someones God given orientation is a sin. Yes, homosexuals can commit sins, just as heterosexuals do. But homosexual, transgender, queer persons are not sinful by nature of their sexuality being outside of the heterosexual norm.
Nate,
You had said “There’s also the leverate law, but we want to forget about that.”
Now I for one do not think that there is anything in the OT that is binding on the Christian today, but since you brought it up, from the list below, what other items do you think are now acceptable for a Christian? You have eliminated v.22 - any others? v.21 or v.23 for example?
Leviticus 18:6-23
” ‘No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD.
7″ ‘Do not dishonor your father by having sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; do not have relations with her.
8″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; that would dishonor your father.
9″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere.
10″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter; that would dishonor you.
11″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father’s wife, born to your father; she is your sister.
12″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with your father’s sister; she is your father’s close relative.
13″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with your mother’s sister, because she is your mother’s close relative.
14″ ‘Do not dishonor your father’s brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations; she is your aunt.
15″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law. She is your son’s wife; do not have relations with her.
16″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with your brother’s wife; that would dishonor your brother.
17″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. Do not have sexual relations with either her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness.
18″ ‘Do not take your wife’s sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living.
19″ ‘Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period.
20″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with your neighbor’s wife and defile yourself with her.
21″ ‘Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molech, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the LORD.
22″ ‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
23″ ‘Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion.
PTI -
Divorce isn’t talked about in the evangelical church near as much as homosexuality, I agree. But that hasn’t been the case on this thread. I addressed the exact issue you’re referring to in my 12:44.
Nate said “I do not mean to dismiss persons, however, I do believe that the rejecting of LGBTQ persons is homophobic and sexist.”
Nate, do you see the non-acceptance of LGBTQ behavior as a rejection of the people who practice such? Cause I do not.
While I believe that the Bible clearly teaches that LGBTQ behavior is against God’s law, I don’t reject people who practice it. I warn them of the direction they are going is leading them.
Oh, and anytime you want to answer my question at 12:30, please feel free.
I gotta home now. I will try to check in later. Time to play with kids!
pti,
I have never heard anyone in the church speak IN FAVOR of divorce or make clubs for them in seminaries. That is what I am hearing people make the case for LGBTQ.
Have you ever spoken in favor of divorce?
Nate -
Why don’t you “buy” the difference between the Old Covenant & the New Covenant? Scripture makes this perfectly clear - it’s virtually the centerpiece of the book of Hebrews. Jesus makes all the difference.
Tim,
Here’s my point:
What if Evangelical Christians gave their divorcee’s the same treatment Scripturally as they do homosexuals?
Churches would empty out quicker than you could say “a Gideon’s Revival”.
Really, does a Christian going through with a divorce, thus committing adultery in Jesus’ words, have any greater claim to the faith than a homosexual Christian who practices the act?
‘Cuz we Christians sure don’t treat the two in like manner.
Just thinking it through.
pti,
If you speak to most divorced Christians, they have either repented of their failure (sin) or are seeking out absolution. Remember, I said most.
I don’t know of any active homosexuals in the church who feel the same of their failure (sin) - perhaps you do.
Mld,
No. I have never spoken in favor of divorce.
Which is my point, exactly.
Is there anything today that is so detrimental to the faith of the next generations as that of children watching their parents go to church and serve in it, only to at some point in time wash their hands of their covenant, marry another partner, make more kids with them, and as a (perhaps inadvertant) consequence absolutely fumble their kids with their former spouse?
Broken hearts and homes.
Yet if preachers in the pulpit would spend HALF the time making their Scriptural text proofs and legal cases against divorce as they do homosexuality we would definitely see a change for the better.
The problem though is ranting against homosexuality is GOOD FOR THE COFFERS while preaching against divorce is not.
Either preach hard against both or be silent about both.
sorry- inadvertent
I know that most of you disagree with me and as such I will not respond verse by verse. I am not going to get drawn into that sort of argument. The bible is a book, an inspired book, but a book none the less. People wrote their experiences and understandings of God and Jesus, but it was people that wrote, not God. The word of God is not a book but a person, Jesus. Jesus tells us to love, to accept, to reach out and be in communion. If some of you want to separate persons from their sexuality OK, but I do not. I believe in the whole person, as God created them. If you disagree you disagree, and clearly a thread on a blog is not going to change your mind.
pti,
I agree with you about divorce, not a doubt about it. Socially, since I am a 2 kingdom guy, I think that the city fathers should whip divorced people in the public square and then let them come to the church for forgiveness.
pti,
You make a good point..one that deserves thought.
MLD,
Absolution only after the premeditated and thought through and worked through and warned against act was committed.
My point is not a rant against divorce so much as a balance to the homosexual conversation.
Michael,
Many have been hurt by this…and they are the silent wounded in the church today. I really believe this.
Nate -
Even you recognize that the Bible is an “inspired” book. The very definition of the word, Scripturally speaking is “God-breathed.” The Bible is indeed the inspired written word of God, and that word always leads us to the Word (Logos) of God, Jesus Christ.
Nate,
Going back to what I said earlier that I don’t believe that men were created to be monogamous (I think we only need to look inward to our own lusts), would you say I was just as acceptable in your communion as an unrepentant serial fornicator and adulterer?
If not, why not?
btw, I am serious when I make the claim that we are not made to be monogamous - it’s a constant fight and this from a guy who has been married for almost 41 yrs and never even dated anyone other than my wife.
to clarify
“would you say I was just as acceptable in your communion as an unrepentant serial fornicator and adulterer?”
meaning me as the unrepentant fornicator and adulterer.
Nate,
Your quote,
“The bible is a book, an inspired book, but a book none the less. People wrote their experiences and understandings of God and Jesus, but it was people that wrote, not God. The word of God is not a book but a person, Jesus.”
I completely agree.
PTI -
“What if Evangelical Christians gave their divorcee’s the same treatment Scripturally as they do homosexuals?”
That’s a good question…and I believe it actually illustrates the opposite point. I obviously can’t speak for the whole of Evangelicals, but from what my experience has been in evangelical churches:
(1) Divorces are rarely (if ever) encouraged.
(2) Divorcees are loved on the basis of their person & what Christ has done for them, not because they’ve been divorced.
(3) Divorcees are not encouraged to keep on getting married & divorced repeatedly.
(4) Their past divorces are looked upon with sadness, but grateful for the forgiveness found in Jesus.
I’ll certainly admit that much of this may be skin-deep among many evangelicals. After all, there’s a reason the divorce rate within the church is as high as it is. But in the several evangelical churches I have been a part of (all within the South, no less), the above has been what I’ve seen.
If homosexuals are treated in the same way, I would think that’d be a good thing.
What am I missing here?
The radical nature of the Gospel is that it tells us God says yes to us even when we say no to God. Do I think that gives us a free pass to do what we will, no, by no means. Additionally, I think it is valid to question the limits of orientation. I cannot think that God would create pedophiles or serial rapists in the same way that God creates homo and hetero and asexual persons.
And to add another point, I do not always buy the new covenant argument because it is used, often, to justify Christians not following most of Leviticus along with the other priestly laws. At the same time, often, often, many people that cite the new covenant continue to reference Leviticus as proof that God is against homosexual actions.
Gotta run…I’ll catch you guys later.
Tim, good points.
I’d add:
(5) Divorce is not really considered adultery in the church thus does not carry the same stigma as homosexuality or an illicit affair.
Nate,
You are a good sport - so how do you feel about infant baptism?
actually, as a Methodist, you probably do baptize babies.
You’re right, I have no problem with baptizing babies.
Nate:
“I know that most of you disagree with me and as such I will not respond verse by verse.”
Well if you are going to go this direction and leave things to your personal authority and interpretation without discussing the text then there really is no more meat than a few people discussing the merits of the various football teams and their chances of making the Superbowl.
You see Nate, Christian is all about the revelation of God and His grace in Jesus Christ as it is revealed in scripture. It is our application of this revelation, which is higher than the general revelation of creation, that defines what we are as His people.
My feelings or experience with homosexuality, divorce, and such “moral” issues really don’t count. what counts is what God has revealed.
You bring out the tired old argument about slavery and the text’s position on it. well quite frankly the text speaks a lot about how one treats his or her servants/slaves. It is the revelation of how biblical we are to treat men which caused the abolition of slavery since there are no biblical laws which outlaws it.
The question I have is, are you a free man or a slave?
London lit a fire here and sat back to watch? Do I smell marshmallows?
But the thread is an interesting ponder: could one throw out the Bible (or book of thoughts about God) and still be redeemed and in the Body (the Royal Family of God)?
Could I speak “Lord, remember me…” as the honest thief crucified beside Jesus did and then go on with no further instruction to edify my new-born spirit being? (probably wouldn’t recognize I had one). Of course! IMO
I could sin up a storm with only my conscience to guide me and I’d still be born again. Aaand I think that would be better than pandering to the book that God gave us - the record of His dealings with man - by saying that it’s open to my own duplistic heart’s interpreting…
but to err is human and none of us are house broken enough to take our mortal flesh straight up to dwell in heaven…
err something like that
just sayin…
oh! and water baptism doesn’t save anyone
in fact I’ve almost come to the conclusion that it is irrelevant… except for that guy on the road to Emmaus (sp?)…
just felt like presumptuously (forgot all those ‘p’ words from yesterday’s list) pontificating
ok, the eunuch was headed home to Ethopia by way of Gaza, not to Emmaus - which I haven’t located on the map - north of Jerusalem?
speaking of eunuchs…
psalm,
“in fact I’ve almost come to the conclusion that it is irrelevant…”
Most of American evangelicals agree with you.
Psalm62:
The question I ask myself is why was the Eunuch in or near Jerusalem and why was he reading the Scriptures?
Yes it is an important question and it leads us to real evangelism and saving faith.
It’s just how I look at scripture and the fact God had the narrative recorded and preserved for me (and you) to read has to have some significance.
Drew
Baptism irrelevant? Hmmmmmmmm… Jesus’s baptism irrelevant. “Go therefore, make disciples (irrelevant ellipses…), teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.”
I would agree baptism doesn’t save, but even Peter thinks it’s the answer of a good conscience toward God.
But irrelevant? With as many lightning storms as we have, I wouldn’t put “baptism” and “irrelevant” in the same sentence.
There’s some NT teachings, like Romans 1, regarding homosexuality. Just saying, it’s not bound to Leviticus.
I love it when London gets mad at me!
Nate
With this statement “The bible is a book, an inspired book, but a book none the less. People wrote their experiences and understandings of God and Jesus, but it was people that wrote, not God.” you just excused yourself from any serious discussion on the matter of sin, righteousness and judgment.
MLD or anyone else with a good memory-
Long ago it seems that the temperment theory by LaHaye and others
came up and it has pretty much been disproved. I tried telling this
to a relative today who believes it like it is the gospel. Rather
than argue, I let it go, but I would like to follow up on it for
my own sake. This relative is a “Melancholy Choleric” and that
added to birth order plus other life experiences is why she is
the way she is and is depressed some of the time. Thirty years
ago I bought into it, but what does this “Phlegmatic Melancholy”
know?
Thanks to whoever can help.
Glenn,
A church I belonged to long ago tried to put me through that test. I told them to drop dead and to figure my category based on that statement.
I don’t know how this stuff keeps getting into the church. The only thing more unchristian was that Prayer of Jabez jibe.
Besides, who is that curious to want to categorize their own temperament? Probably better off reading astrological charts.
but then you can probably guess that I don’t think LaHaye has made any improvement in his later works either.
MLD
One thing I found on the web was from astrologers who
said that they were the real source of the theory and
that the psychologists borrowed it from them. I have
to agree with you just this once
Actually I agree with you more than I care to admit -
except on infant baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and
the end times. I guess it’s because I am old and
crabby like London was saying!
Glenn, wait, I’m old and crabby - and I like it that way!
Wasn’t that LaHaye temperament stuff just a knock off of that thing when people were doing their colors?
I don’t think the man has ever had an original thought.
reading this whole thread has been enlightening, even though I should be packing for my Godson’s infant baptism this weekend. I’m a fellow Drewid (alumni now in the real world living out call to teaching middle school kids social studies in public schools and running a youth group in a little less than medium UMC church) But I say Rock on to Nate because he gets into it so much better and more serious than I ever can, and to MLD, about your verses list from Leviticus, doesn’t it just remind you of a Jerry Springer casting call? I’m sure that show has gotten down right biblical at times with its “clients.”
and as Forest Gump would say, “and that’s all I have to say about that.”
Goodnight.
Natalie,
Good call on the list. I always wondered what Springer used for casting requirements - now I know the rest of the story.
Protestant liberalism of the 20’s said much of what Nate is saying about the bible. The good part about that was it gave rise to a return to the truths of the bible in a movement called fundamentalism. Unfortunately, at this time there is a lot of baggage attached to that term (rightfully so) My point is liberalism with the scriptures doesn’t last long.
Drew, factoid: the eunuch was in Jerusalem to worship.
so was he a Jew? I didn’t notice if eunuchs are on the list of marginalized people that Nate’s college (University?) ministers to… so tired of hearing how intolerant we are… but admire all acts of mercy
Baptism… well, I opted for an immersion 2nd time around as that was good enough for our Lord… but that didn’t make Him a Christian. I think baptism is a testimony to the world of our faith, not a salvation issue
to coin a phrase ‘that’s all I have to say tonight, too
except for one little thing
how can anyone truly get into The Book and not be stunned by its continuity? kind of like the watch that proves the watchmaker (yes, there are lame arguments attempting to refute the example and they are lame)
If it isn’t God’s iron grip on the contents, then there’s another deity out there somewhere writing books…
God keep all close and comforted this night.
Nate……greetings, and good luck! I’m staying out of this one because it’s just not worth the pain. I love the folk here, value them, and have met several. They have shown me love and grace. That said, when the topic leans toward approval of homosexuality, things can get ugly. I am more conservative Biblically than you are. I DO believe the Bible is the Word of God. Accepting that homosexual relationships are sometimes valid has negated my salvation in the eyes of some folk here. Hurts. Peace out.
Call me crotchety but at least I am consistent. I will always make a stand for the authority of scripture while at the same time (hopefully) being gracious, and compassionate. I think I have demonstrated all three…at least I think the people I come in contact here in the NW would say that.
I have to agree about the Christian “celebrity” problem. Too many get overly excited about “Christian Celebrity” coming to town. Can’t help but notice that most don’t have the same excitement about God’s revelation of Himself in Scripture.
Also, my son watches videos by “Christian” artists and honestly at least 1/3 of the songs would be considered pop songs if not for the Christian label of the artist/band. I don’t mean stylistically - my own playing style is somewhat akin to a fusion of Satriani and Petrucci and bands like Seventh Day Slumber play heavy with lyrics that glorify God. A lot of what passes for CCM sounds like it is bettr suited for Radio Disney or KROQ.
inof, thought about you alot today. Love your heart for the Lord, love you. May God keep you this fine evening.
“The weird thing is Piper is NOT a cold-hearted, stereo-typical Calvinist.”
Wow. I don’t really know any cold-hearted, stereo-typical Calvinists. Where can I find some?
jlo, thankyou……I can go to sleep with some peace and comfort. I love you, too.
Steve, likely you are a kind person who would give the shirt off his back, but the last few exchanges we had on the “H” topic were hurtful and the wounds are still there. You find comfort in ‘taking a stand’, okay, I get that. Likely the son of a long-time personal friend of mine to whom you caused pain you had a ‘reason’. Since it’s none of my business and she has the class to keep it private….I am left with wanting to slap the snot out of you. You ‘had my back’ for a long time, then, in my experience, you turned on me. I will live as I have alot of support in real time and even here. Finally, my salvation is as authentic as yours. Same Blood that covers you, covers me. God guards, guides, and governs me the same as he does you.
Steveo. At least I’m not that mad at you. Don’t want to slap the snot out of you
I just wanted you to go get another cuppa
you do have a way about you..I’ll give ya that much.
I never want to hurt any one and I am as involved with helping people as anyone. I never want to use the scriptures as a weapon But please don’t ask me to change what the bible says about stuff. I am have a track record for being a compassionate man to all people. But when push comes to shove, I will always opt for the classic orthodox meaning of scriptures. If that causes a division then I guess I’ll have to live with that…so slap away
I think I’ve said this before but I have shown and will continue to show compassion to all people…ALL PEOPLE…Even those who want to do harm to me. I am not hateful person and would never harm or propogate harm to any person or group of people. But it is not an act of hate to say that the practice of homosexuality is not an acceptable life style.
All sinners are welcome in our church and should be in the body of Christ. But not all sin is tolerated. We are a group of faulty people helping each other. When one falls, and they do, who ever they are we don’t castigate them but do our best to help restore them in the spirit of gentleness considering ourselves lest we should fall”
And you want to harm me because of that stance?
I am old enough to remember a day in this country when sick, disgusting, behavior was regarded as sick, disgusting behavior.
Anyone gonna watch this?
http://www.ecclesianet.com/
Steve, your church sounds like a blessed place and a safe place. Would I really slap the snot out of you? NO WAY….forgot to put the emoticons. God would deal strongly with me were I to get physical with anyone. I like gentleness, but a few months back a couple of you decided that the not-so-gentle approach was appropriate. Mostly I’ve moved past it, but yesterday’s discussion kinda brought it up again. I apologize to you for venturing where my ample nose did not belong. You are a man of God, a kind person, who, for some reason doesn’t ‘like’ me so much anymore. I will meet you in person soon as I plan a visit to CCSalem. Hopefully you’ll show me a cuppa coffee and not the door. I’ll even wear a dress and makeup. I’m sorry for my rudeness yesterday.
Dansk
Nov 13th, 2009 at 4:46 am
I am old enough to remember a day in this country when sick, disgusting, behavior was regarded as sick, disgusting behavior.
So Dansk, who of us has NEVER been guilty of sick disgusting behavior? Who appointed you judge, jury, and executioner over all that nasty stuff? You don’t get to pick and choose. That is what I find personally sick and disgusting. We are ALL guilty and that’s why we all need Jesus!