Africa to the Rescue!

Tags

Africa, Christianity, Homosexuality, Humanity, Salvation, Same-Sex Marriage, Truth, United Methodists

Earlier this week, the United Methodists voted to accept the Traditional Plan, maintaining and strengthening their stance against the sexual revolution.  This decision likely came as a surprise to many, considering that it goes against the direction America’s mainline Protestant denominations have been taking for some time now.  There’s talk about a schism, some liberals fear an SBC-like conservative shift (“fundamentalist takeover” is their preferred terminology).  Time will tell.

But, for the moment, it would seem that God has been gracious to the UMC.  His instrument in turning them from the brink, or at least slowing their course, would appear to be the sizeable part of their denomination that resides outside the U.S., notably in Africa.  I have seen no statistics on the breakdown in the vote itself, but commentators on both sides of the debate appear agreed that the African vote was decisive to the conservative victory.

But, of course, the difference between the conservatives and the liberals was not essentially ethnic, but ethical.  The divide was theological, and this became evident in some of the arguments before and responses after the decision.

The conservative position is theocentric–centered on God.  They are concerned with obedience to what God says in His Word, with holiness and truth.  They care about people, but recognize that celebrating sin doesn’t actually help people, even if it’s what people want you to do.  God must be honored and trusted, and the gospel must be proclaimed untarnished.

The liberal position is anthropocentric–centered on humanity.  They were concerned about hurting people, which is good, but they let harm be defined by the pagan culture around them.  They bought the world’s narrative about human flourishing, informed by the idea that aberrant sexual desires are identity categories analogous to race.  They seek to remain relevant in a changing world, but they haven’t learned the lesson of the other mainline denominations: seeking relevance, they traded timeless truth for momentary error, and became almost immediately irrelevant.

The key is that a human-centered theology will not actually lead to human flourishing.  Only a God-centered theology will do that.  The Creator knows what is best for His creatures.  We should trust Him.  The African Methodists are helping the American Methodists remember that.

 

 

Advertisements

The Choice

Tags

Bible, Christianity, Homosexuality, LGBTQ+, Scripture, Truth, United Methodists

Pray for the United Methodists this weekend.  At a special session, held in St. Louis, they will be making a decision that is likely to be critical for the future of their denomination, and for their witness in a lost world.

The issue, of course, is whether to embrace or reject the sexual revolution.  Unless they put the issue off again, they will be choosing either to hold their present biblical position regarding human sexuality, or to revise it some way or another, affirming (in varying degrees) LGBTQ+ identity.  Either result will probably mean the fracturing of their denomination, whether immediately or more slowly.

Religion News, a propaganda machine for liberal “Christianity”, has published a showcase of opinions regarding what some Methodists hope will result from the session.  It is a very slanted piece of reporting (granted, it is labeled an Opinion piece), a collection of voices that are mostly liberal to very liberal, with a couple of very gentle conservative voices included to soften the one-sidedness.  But, as a piece of liberal advocacy, the article does highlight what is at stake for the Methodists in this session.

It begins with a reminder that the denomination has already effectively caved to the sexual revolution, and only by repentance and submission to God will they be able to turn back from the precipice of paganism that looms before them.  They already have an openly lesbian bishop.  Having biblical standards regarding human sexuality on paper isn’t worth much if you ignore them in practice.

The voices that follow show the inroads of secularism and paganism in their denomination’s leadership.

Rev. Adam Hamilton says:

It requires patience, humility and grace to look at people with whom you disagree on an issue or theological point and say, “You are still my brother or sister.” It requires a willingness to say, “I don’t agree with you here, but I value what you bring to the table, and I need you.”

As though gross sexual immorality were a matter of adiaphora or theological minutia!  Hamilton regards willingness to tolerate this sort of thing as a sign of patience, humility, and grace.  The Scriptures regard that sort of tolerance as a spiritual failing, not a virtue (see 1 Cor. 5).

Rev. Alex da Silva Souto speaks in worldly terms of discrimination, framing this (as the culture has so effectively done) in terms stolen from the civil rights movement.  He says:

Which is why I and thousands of other United Methodists support the Simple Plan, which would strike from our Book of Discipline all discriminatory language against LGBTQIA+ people. After decades of systemic harm, the only solution is returning to the first rule of United Methodism: “Do no harm.” The Simple Plan proposes exactly that. We must first stop the spiritual/physical harm against LGBTQIA+ people, and only then can we have a real conversation about “human sexuality.”

Very good.  First, let the pagan culture set the agenda, then engage in theological reflection.  Step 1, surrender, step 2, sit down at the diplomatic table.  What could go wrong?

Rev. Beth Ann Cook begins insightfully.  She recognizes that there is an underlying issue:

Our theological division is not limited to the issue of human sexuality. Sexual ethics are the presenting problem for a deeper theological division in our church.

But her following comment makes clear that she does not grasp what the underlying issue is:

The Commission on a Way Forward spent countless hours looking at every possibility. There is no perfect plan. Passing any of the plans will violate someone’s deeply held convictions in such a way that they will feel unable to remain part of our denomination.

Deeply held convictions are not worth defending simply because they are deeply held convictions.  Atheists have deeply held convictions, but you shouldn’t let them guide your denominational policy.

The underlying issue is whether or not God should be believed and obeyed.  A perfect plan, in this case, is one that says God should be believed and obeyed, and that those whose deeply held convictions disagree with this are welcome the to leave.  The Traditional Plan probably approximates this closely enough.

The Scriptures are not unclear about the issues being debated here.  This is not a matter of difficult biblical interpretation.  Besides the clear condemnations of homosexuality in various biblical passages (e.g., Rom. 1:26-27; 1 Tim. 1:10), the opening chapters of Genesis lay the groundwork for a sound theological anthropology, and attendant doctrine of human sexuality.  God created mankind in His image, male and female (Gen. 1:27).  He made us man and woman, equal in dignity and glory as His image-bearers, immutably different from each other, and sexually complementary (Gen. 2:18-24).

That is, God created humanity in two genders, male and female; both men and women are fully human and equal; men and women are different, not changeable and not interchangeable; sexual intimacy is designed to be enjoyed by a man and woman within the covenant of marriage.

We could go on through the article, but it isn’t necessary.  This is the issue, often buried beneath worldly rhetoric or the laudable goal of unity.  Is God to be believed, trusted, and obeyed?

God’s Word is clear.  The issue for the United Methodists is a question of whether to believe God’s Word and accept its authority; that is a question of whether to believe God and accept His authority.  The alternative is the anthropology and sexual mores of an increasingly pagan culture.  Ultimately, then, the United Methodists are deciding between God and idols, between Christianity and paganism.

I pray they make the right choice.

And She Even Has the Hat

Tags

Abortion, Faith, Forgiveness, Occult, Sacrifice, Sorcery, Truth, Witchcraft

It would be far too easy to laugh off the First Annual Christian Witches Convention.  Their syncretism of Christianity with paganism is absurd, their justifications for their understanding of Scripture are farcical, they’ve chosen to maximize irony by meeting in Salem, MA, and the ‘Reverend’ Valerie Love even has the hat.  It’s as though they’re trying not to be taken seriously.

But I think they are serious.  The evil they represent is serious.  The seriousness with which God regards it is shown in His words to the Israelites: “Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead.  Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD” (Deut. 18:10-12, NIV).

We live in a culture where the pagan practice of sacrificing sons and daughters is widespread; it should be no surprise that other elements of pagan spirituality show increasing acceptance and popularity.  The farce of this vaudevillian episode is the basic absurdity of idolatry, the grotesque folly of worshipping a statue made of wood (Isa. 44:14-16).  Such foolish beliefs seem plausible to the mind darkened by rejecting God (see Rom. 1:21-23).

But let no Christian be deceived.  The new heavens and new earth belong to the faithful in Christ; “But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars–they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur.  This is the second death” (Rev. 21:8).

Now is the day of repentance.  The cross of mercy still stands.  For those who have followed the way of paganism, who have sacrificed their sons or daughters, who have practiced sorcery, there is yet one hope: repent, believe the gospel, and be saved.  The Savior’s arm are still outstretched to you.  There is no hope in sorcery; there is forgiveness and life in Jesus Christ.  But you must choose one.

Indispensable

Tags

Jesus Christ, Liberalism, Salvation, Soteriology, Union with Christ

“Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life” (1 Jn. 5:12, NIV).  Union with Christ is the great gift of the gospel.  Knowing Christ is the key to meaning, hope, and eternal life.

Reformation 21 has been gracious enough to publish another piece of mine, this one on the centrality of union with Christ.  Head on over and take a look!

I Believe We Have Located the Problem…

Tags

Atheism, Canada, Christianity, God, Inclusivity, Liberalism, Scripture, Theism, Truth

While all of us who minister do so only by the grace of God, and I am keenly aware of my unworthiness for this high and holy calling, I think some of the minimal qualifications of pastoral ministry are rather intuitive–such as believing in God.

The United Church of Canada has decided, apparently, that theism is not strictly necessary for pastors.  No doubt it is still desirable in the eyes of that denomination’s discerning leadership that their pastors believe in God; but it is not a deal-breaker.  That is the inescapable message of the news that the denomination has decided Rev. Gretta Vosper, an avowed atheist, will continue to pastor West Hill United Church, in Toronto.

The article linked above, from the liberal Religion News Service, is enlightening.  It begins, “Gretta Vosper is surprised to still be a minister.”  I’d imagine quite a lot of people share her surprise.  It’s a rather puzzling thing, until you follow the (il)logic.

How does the United Church of Canada justify this decision?  Why would a Christian denomination allow an atheist to shepherd a church?  The key is inclusivity.  The denominational leaders found themselves wrestling with the tension between two of their “core values”: “our faith in God” and “our commitment to being an open and inclusive church.”

So, by “inclusive” they mean not simply that they welcome different groups of people, but that they welcome people with a variety of doctrines (or lack thereof) into the clergy.  Aha.  That would create a conflict with your cherished belief in the existence of God.  The leaders of the United Church of Canada have found themselves in the embarrassing situation of wanting to affirm x and not-x at the same time.  I suppose the implication of their solution is that they will accept either x or not-x (please choose one); which is to say that the United Church of Canada believes nothing at all, or at least not with any real conviction.

How does a denomination get to such a pitiful place?  Quite obviously they have let themselves be swept along by the winds of western cultural trends and ideologies; the zeitgeist, rather than the Holy Ghost, has been filling their sails.  But it’s more specific than that.

The atheist pastor herself offers what may be the key.  In this she does a valuable service to orthodox Christianity, if we will heed it.  From the article:

Vosper was willing to go through with the hearing even if the ruling went against her.  She said she is fit for ministry in the church.

She said she believes what she was taught in seminary.

“Everything I teach is consistent with the theological training I received,” the 60-year-old said.  “I was taught the Bible was a human construction, and there is much wisdom in many texts, both ancient and contemporary.”

During her studies, Vosper said she learned that the Bible isn’t the only source of spiritual or moral authority.

“If the Bible is not the authoritative word of God for all time,” she says, “why does it take such a central position in the United Church?”

Well, I think she has put her finger right on the problem.  The rot took hold of their seminaries, particularly a rotten doctrine of Scripture, a loss of the orthodox doctrine that the Bible is uniquely inspired, completely true, and utterly authoritative.  Her seminary professors passed down to her a faith uprooted and blighted, and at whatever point in her journey it followed the logical course and became no faith at all.

But Vosper can perhaps take some comfort that the Bible does not enjoy nearly so central a place in the United Church as she feared.  If that were the case, they might have put more weight on the fact that the Bible starts with the words, “In the beginning, God…” (Gen. 1:1).

We have here a wake-up call for faithful Christians in the United Church of Canada–it might be time for an exit plan; a cautionary tale for the orthodox–guard your institutions, because what’s taught in seminary doesn’t stay in seminary; a warning for theological moderates who want to see more doctrinal inclusivity in your denominations–you might find yourselves inclusive’d all the way to atheism.

The good news is that this disease is easily preventable.  There’s a ready antidote to this poison.  There’s an extremely popular book that could be studied in seminaries to promote deep and widespread theism among the ministerial students.  “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16-17, NASB).

The Massacre of Innocents

Tags

Abortion, America, Humanity, Planned Parenthood, Repentance, Truth

King Herod Gov. Cuomo has recently signed into law legislation that makes it legal in the Empire State to put to death babies in the womb, at any time prior to birth, and for (effectively) any reason.  With much fanfare, the pro-abortion state legislators advanced this assault on the life of the most vulnerable.  The blood of the innocents is on those clapping hands, who have enabled this unspeakable evil.

We are reminded that America today tolerates an evil as great as any in our nation’s history.  Powerful forces promote the killing of babies, most notably Planned Parenthood; as their president, Leana Wen, recently said, “our core mission is providing, protecting and expanding access to abortion and reproductive healthcare.”  The key lie that abets this vicious crime is the idea that abortion is healthcare, rather than the destruction of an innocent and vulnerable human life.  This is what Planned Parenthood has recently tried to reinforce in a billboard campaign, where one of the images features a woman with the quote “I had an abortion, & it was just healthcare.”  It wasn’t.  It was the murder of a baby.  Other messages begin the same way, but end “and I am not ashamed” or “and I am not apologizing.”  But shame is appropriate in this case, and apologizing would not be nearly enough.  Repentance is necessary, before the throne of God.  Only there can healing and forgiveness be found.

Worst of all, this widespread wickedness is given cover by some who claim to serve God.  The priests of Molech liberal clergy also have made news in their support for this evil.  The rector of Trinity Episcopal Church, and other supposedly Christian leaders, should perhaps have sensed something was amiss with their theology when they found themselves teaming up with the minister from the First Unitarian Universal Church.  All pretensions of Christianity aside, nothing is so pagan as child sacrifice.

The child in the womb is a human being, made in the image of God.  Their lives are sacred, and abortion is a hideous evil.

Yet remember also that Christ died to save a world of sinners; that when we turn to Him with repentance and faith, He forgives all our sins.  And God may yet give us the grace of national repentance, and have mercy on us, and turn our nation from this evil.  For this we should pray.

 

First and Most Offensive

Tags

China, Christ, Lordship, Persecution, Ten Commandments

The Chinese government’s persecution of the church has risen considerably in recent times.  What animates this animosity towards their good and peaceful Christian citizens?  At the deepest level, I think it is the war between the Prince of Peace and the prince of darkness, who holds the powers of this world.  But this plays out through the particular political and social situation.  As China becomes increasingly totalitarian, the presence of people who have a higher loyalty than the state becomes increasingly problematic–no matter what good citizens these people are in other ways.

So it was highlighted the other day that Chinese government officials had entered a church and ordered the removal of the ten commandments.  There was a particular commandment that President Xi Jinping found objectionable.  Any guesses which one?

The first one, of course.  The first and most offensive commandment, “You shall have no other gods before me.”  That commandment, the call to render first and foremost allegiance to God Almighty, a tyrant cannot abide.

This is the basic condition of the spiritual war in which we are engaged.  The first Christians declared that Jesus Christ, not Caesar, is Lord.  Christians today must say the same, and Caesars today will rage against Christ and His people.

But this first commandment is not only offensive to dictators.  It carries the same offense on a personal level, and each and every one of us has a dictator in the heart.  One of the anthems of American popular culture is ‘it’s my life and I’ll do what I want with it.’  Against the rebelliousness of the human heart stands the divine command, “have no other gods before me.”

Jesus Christ offers hope, freedom from the self-tyranny that ends in emptiness and despair and death.  Jesus offers life and restoration.  The promise still stands, that “If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Rom. 10:9, NIV).

The Cost of Having a Spine

Tags

Conscience, Integrity, Transgenderism, Truth

Peter Vlaming has paid the price for being a man of integrity and sense in America today.  The Virginia school teacher was fired because of his unwillingness to march in step with the mandates of the transgender movement.  He has committed the terrible offense of refusing to lie about a student’s identity, and therefore must be punished.  The revolution does not brook dissent.

From what the article says, it doesn’t seem Mr. Vlaming was even very confrontational about things.  He was perfectly willing to just refer to the student by name.  But, in a moment when a quick word was required, to try and prevent the student from coming to harm, he accidentally referred to her as she.  She has recently started identifying as he, so this was completely unacceptable and has led to Mr. Vlaming being disciplined because he will not recant.

The story is disturbing.  The school board’s decision was apparently unanimous, which tells us that the whole group has lost the use of their reason; not only are they fully on board with jettisoning science in favor of feelings, but they fully support trampling Mr. Vlaming’s freedom of conscience.  These are people tasked with overseeing the education of children–an education that ideally would include a modest grasp of biology and respect for other people’s conscience.

Here is the school’s Principal: “I can’t think of a worse way to treat a child than what was happening”.  Really?  You are a high school principal, and you can’t think of anything that would be more abusive to a student than a teacher lovingly refusing to lie to them about their gender?  And you are someone who should be entrusted to oversee education?

Here is the West Point Schools Superintendent: “That discrimination then leads to creating a hostile learning environment.  And the student had expressed that.  The parent had expressed that…They felt disrespected.”  So the feelings of the student and parent overturn reality?  Conscientiously refusing to lie is discrimination?  And your leadership as Superintendent is going to help the school train students in integrity and rational thought?

This is the consequence of the secularization of American education.  Having rejected the knowledge of God, they have lost the knowledge of mankind as well.  They purport to educate children, but they have educated themselves out of what even most children know–the difference between boys and girls.  The goal now is to miseducate children into sharing their ignorance of this basic facet of humanity.

It is, of course, a clash of fundamental worldviews.  Mr. Vlaming has the Christian worldview, wherein the world is intelligible and humanity is understandable, as creatures of a loving Creator; “in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them” (Gen. 1:27, NIV).  And the same God who told him what boys and girls are told him he must not lie about it.

The authorities in the West Point Schools have a secular worldview, wherein the world is unintelligible and the human being is in flux.  Girls may become boys, so ultimately there are no such things as girls and boys.  Educators should cooperate in the spiritual and psychological abuse of children by helping confuse them about their gender.  Truth and conscience are to be trampled upon in the rush to accommodate feelings.  Reason is out, but the argumentum ad baculum is very much in.

Now, which worldview would we rather see at work in our nation’s educators?  A difficult choice, to be sure.

Believing God

Tags

Authority, Celebrities, Homosexuality, Scripture, Truth

It takes courage and clarity of thought (not a lot of courage and clarity of thought, but a little) to engage in moral reasoning in public.  It’s easy for us to lose our nerve or suddenly become confused when put on the spot.  That’s why it’s so important for Christians to be deeply rooted in the Scriptures; we can stand on God’s truth, even when our wits desert us.

Singer Lauren Daigle has recently been caught up in a kerfluffle.  While open about her Christian identity, she has recently publicly stated that she can’t say whether or not homosexuality is a sin.  Why not?  As is usual in cases like these, the problem seems to be that she doesn’t have a good grasp on the authority of Scripture.

In the first place, relationships with homosexuals have confused her about whether it is right or wrong.  “I have too many people that I love and they are homosexuals,” Miss Daigle said.  This is standard fare, a basic strategy of the sexual revolution.  Normalization has done its work on her.  The logic is, once you get to know people who do x, and see that they are regular, kind, good people, you will come to realize that x isn’t sin.  But that does not follow.  Regular, kind, ‘good’ people do all kinds of sinful things.  Scripture tells us what is sinful, not social mores and the practices of people we love.

But that, again, is standard fare.  I found her other piece of reasoning more interesting.  Miss Daigle went on to say, “I can’t say one way or the other, I’m not God.”  This is not new either, but it is a rather extreme case.  She is saying, in effect, that only God can make a proper moral judgment on this issue.  It follows that, if you claim to have the answer about whether or not homosexuality is sin, you are putting yourself in the place of God.

I think that what is going on is that Miss Daigle has confused judging people with making moral judgments about issues.  This is a confusion encouraged by the left, who insist that making moral judgments about certain issues is condemning people, thus bigoted and hateful, etc.  Pope Francis is famous for falling into this trap, with his “Who am I to judge?” response on this very issue several years ago.

It must be observed that this only arises regarding certain issues.  Ask Pope Francis what he thinks about greed, and suddenly he will rediscover his ability and prerogative to make moral judgments–even to judge greedy people.  Ask Lauren Daigle what she thinks about racism, and I’m guessing she will have no problem making the correct moral judgment, even though she’s not God, and without any sense that one needs to be God in order to know the truth.

That tells us that the sudden inability to engage in moral reasoning, the sense that to do so would be putting oneself in the place of God, is a smokescreen.  I do not mean that Miss Daigle was lying.  Perhaps her nerve failed her, when put on the spot; but perhaps she is only confuses what is already confused to her.  There is a whole advocacy machine at work trying to change Christians’ minds about this issue.  The fog is thick in our culture.

What Christians must understand is that God’s Word is authoritative, and cuts through the fog with the mighty gale of the Spirit, the clarion call of truth, the light in our cultural darkness.  Miss Daigle was right in that God is the judge and His judgments are true.  But that would mean that making moral judgments is putting oneself in the place of God only if God had been silent.  If God has spoken, then it is good and proper obedience to cling to what God has said.  If God has spoken, then it is putting oneself in the place of God to deny the truth of what God has said.  If God has spoken, then we can know the truth.

If God has spoken and told us what is true, then we must have the clarity and courage to cling to God’s truth.

You don’t have to be God to know moral truth.  You just have to believe God.

Semper Reformanda

Tags

Authority, Scripture

The good folks at Reformation 21 have been so kind as to post another of my pieces.  This one is on the authority of Scripture for believers.  Head on over and check it out!