sanity

"The Statistics on Sanity are that one out of every four people is suffering from a mental illness. Look at your 3 best friends. If they're okay then it's you." - Amy Wright

lord vader

mahaney on small groups

C.J. Mahaney lays out four Scriptural goals that should be accomplished in small groups. These goals are

• Progressive Sanctification -- an ongoing work of God and man that makes us more and more free from sin and like Christ in our actual lives. (in regards to Sanctification, Mahaney later says, "Small groups are not primarily intended for teaching and preaching; those functions are the responsibility of your pastor. Rather, small groups are designed for application.")
• Mutual Care -- the practical outworking of our sacrificial love for each other which results in meeting one another's needs and carrying one another's burdens.
• Fellowship -- participating in one another's lives because of the unifying bond we share in Jesus. This is more than just friendship or social activity, it is an active pursuit to see and be Jesus in the lives of other believers.
• The Ministry of the Holy Spirit -- using the gifts given to us by the Holy Spirit to enhance our fellowship together and to accomplish Jesus' mission together.

HT:DR

Technorati Tags: small groups

wide awake

Wide Awake: The Life Giving Power of Worship

The following article was written by Casey Corum.

"The glory of God is man; fully alive" - St. Irenaeus of Lyons

At first reading, this often-quoted phrase can be interpreted in a number of ways. Let's explore this from a couple of different angles.

The glory of God is man - fully alive. In other words, it can be put forward that there is a measure to which God is glorified when we are fully being ourselves. God is glorified as we express our God-given gifts, talents, quirks and personalities. In other words, we are us being truly "us." I'm reminded of the quote from the 1981 movie, Chariots of Fire, when the character playing runner Eric Liddell expresses this thought:

"I believe God made me for a purpose, but He also made me fast. And when I run I feel His pleasure."

I think this quote gets at the heart of this idea - that God can be glorified when we express how He has made us. It is a powerful idea, indeed.

Another angle we can observe this quote from might be better understood if we turn St. Irenaeus' quote around on itself this way:

"Man fully alive, is man glorifying God."

I also love this interpretation because I believe it digs into the heart of our higher purpose and calling as the children of God. This is to say that our highest and most noble purpose, the place where we truly find that for which we are made, is to be found in that place of worship, glorifying God with all we are. This is the place we find His life in exchange for our own.

We can sense some of the deep joy to be found in this place of worship expressed in the words of Paul found in Romans 11:33,

"Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and His paths beyond tracing out!"

Technorati Tags: worship

fellowship

J.I. Packer writes, "We should not think of our fellowship with other Christians as a spiritual luxury, an optional addition to the exercises of private devotions. Fellowship is one of the great words of the New Testament; it denotes something that is vital to a Christian's spiritual health, and central to the Church's true life... The church will flourish and Christians will be strong only when there is fellowship."

Technorati Tags: small groups

mercy based repentance

“Repentance out of mere fear is really sorrow for the consequences of sin, sorrow over the danger of sin — it bends the will away from sin, but the heart still clings. But repentance out of conviction over mercy is really sorrow over sin, sorrow over the grievousness of sin — it melts the heart away from sin. It makes the sin itself disgusting to us, so it loses its attractive power over us. We say, ‘this disgusting thing is an affront to the one who died for me. I’m continuing to stab him with it!’” - Timothy Keller, Church Planter Manual

happy thanksgiving

evil for good

John Piper ...

The heart of the Bible is not an explanation of where evil came from, but a demonstration of how God enters into it and turns it for the very opposite - everlasting righteousness and joy.

God takes what we meant of evil at one level and turns it into good (Gen 50.20; Acts 2.23, 4.27-28; Isa 53.10). Piper again ...

This is why Jesus came to die. God meant to show the world that there is no sin and no evil too great that God cannot bring from it everlasting righteousness and joy. The very suffering that we caused became the hope of our salvation. "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Luke 23.34).

past, present, and future

John Piper in Reason 47 of Why Jesus Came to Die - To Rescue Us From Final Judgment ...

The Christian idea of salvation relates to past, present, and future. The Bible says, "By grace you have been saved through faith" (Eph 2.8). It says that the gospel is the power of God "to us who are being saved" (1 Cor 1.18). And it say, " Salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed" (Rom 13.11). We have been saved. We are being saved. We will be saved.

At every stage we are saved by the death of Christ. In the past, once for all, our sins were paid for by Christ himself. We were justified by faith alone. In the present, the death of Christ secures the power of God's Spirit to save us progressively from the domination and contamination of sin. And in the future, it will be the blood of Christ, poured out on the cross, that protects us from the wrath of God and brings us to perfection and joy.

...

Those who reject Christ and give their allegiance to another "will drink the wine of God's wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and ... will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night" (Rev 14.10-11).

good deeds

We were not saved by good works but for good works (2 Tim 1.9; Titus 2.14, Eph 2.10). We are not to merely avoid evil, we are to pursue good - and we are to do that to the glory of our Father (Matt 5.16).

To achieve this, as John Piper puts it, "first comes the pardon of Christ, then the pattern of Christ." Paul tells us in Phil 3.9-10 that his ambition was first to share in Christ's righteousness by faith, and then to share his sufferings in ministry. Again, Piper, "Justification precedes and makes possible imitation. Christ's suffering for justification makes possible our suffering for proclamation. Our suffering for others does not remove the wrath of God. It shows the value of having the wrath of God removed by the suffering of Christ. It points people to him. ... Our suffering is crucial (2 tim 2.10), but Christ's alone saves. Therefore, let us imitate his love, but not take his place."

In Christ, we use our freedom to serve one another (Gal 5.13).

the new gospel

Kevin DeYoung on the "New Gospel":

The New Gospel generally has four parts to it.

It usually starts with an apology: “I’m sorry for my fellow Christians. I understand why you hate Christianity. It’s like that thing Ghandi said, ‘why can’t the Christians be more like their Christ?’ Christians are hypocritical, judgmental, and self-righteous. I know we screwed up with the Crusades, slavery, and the Witch Trials. All I can say is: I apologize. We’ve not give you a reason to believe.”

Then there is an appeal to God as love: “I know you’ve seen the preachers with the sandwich boards and bullhorns saying ‘Repent or Die.’ But I’m here to tell you God is love. Look at Jesus. He hung out with prostitutes and tax collectors. He loved unconditionally. There is so much brokenness in the world, but the good news of the Bible is that God came to live right in the middle of our brokenness. He’s a messy God and his mission is love. ‘I did not come into the world to condemn the world,’ that’s what Jesus said (John 3:17). He loved everyone, no matter who you were or what you had done. That’s what got him killed.”

The third part of the New Gospel is an invitation to join God on his mission in the world: “It’s a shame that Christians haven’t shown the world this God. But that’s what we are called to do. God’s kingdom is being established on earth. On earth! Not in some distant heaven after we die, but right here, right now. Even though we all mess up, we are God’s agents to show his love and bring this kingdom. And we don’t do that by scaring people with religious language or by forcing them into some religious mold. We do it by love. That’s the way of Jesus. That’s what it means to follow him. We love our neighbor and work for peace and justice. God wants us to become the good news for a troubled planet.”

And finally, there is a studied ambivalence about eternity: “Don’t get me wrong, I still believe in life after death. But our focus should be on what kind of life we can live right now. Will some people go to hell when they die? Who am I to say? Does God really require the right prayer or the right statement of faith to get into heaven? I don’t know, but I guess I can leave that in his hands. My job is not to judge people, but to bless. In the end, God’s amazing grace may surprise us all. That’s certainly what I hope for.”

Wow!!! That's all too familiar these days. I see that everyday in the blogsphere and even in my personal interaction with Christian friends. They seem almost unaware of how their thinking has be affected by the weltgeist. DeYoung explains how this can easily happen.

1. It is partially true. God is love. The kingdom has come. Christians can be stupid. The particulars of the New Gospel are often justifiable.
2. It deals with strawmen. The bad guys are apocalyptic street preachers, Crusaders, and caricatures of an evangelical view of salvation.
3. The New Gospel leads people to believe wrong things without explicitly stating those wrong things. That is, Christians who espouse the New Gospel feel safe from criticism because they never actually said belief is unimportant, or there is no hell, or that Jesus isn’t the only way, or that God has no wrath, or that there is no need for repentance. These distortions are not explicitly stated, but the New Gospel is presented in such a way that non-believers could, and by design should, come to these conclusions. In other words, the New Gospel allows the non-Christian to hear what he wants, while still providing an out against criticism from other Christians. The preacher of the New Gospel can always say when challenged, “But I never said I don’t believe those things.”
4. It is manageable. The New Gospel meets people where they are and leaves them there. It appeals to love and helping our neighbors. And it makes the appeal in a way that repudiates any hint of judgmentalism, intolerance, or religiosity. This is bound to be popular. It tells us what we want to hear and gives us something we can do.
5. The New Gospel is inspirational. This is what makes the message so appealing to young people in particular. They get the thrill and purpose of being part of a big cause, without all the baggage of the Church’s history, doctrine, and hard edges. Who wouldn’t want to join a revolution of love?
6. The New Gospel has no offense to it. This is why the message is so attractive. The bad guys are all “out there.” This can be a problem for any of us. We are all prone to soft-pedaling the gospel, only presenting the attractive parts and failing to mention where Christ does not just comfort but also confronts. And it must confront more than the sins of others. It is far too easy to use the New Gospel as a way to differentiate yourself from all the bad Christians. This makes you look good and confirms to the non-Christians that the obstacle to their commitment lies with the hypocrisy and failure of others. There is no talk of repentance or judgment. There is no hint that Jesus was killed, not so much for his inclusive love as his outrageous Godlike claims (Matt. 26:63-66; 27:39-43). The New Gospel only talks of salvation in strictly cosmic terms. In fact, the door is left wide open to imagine that hell, if it even exists, is probably not a big threat for most people.

So what's wrong with that? As usual, DeYoung has a few suggestions ...

It shouldn’t be hard to see what is missing in the new gospel. What’s missing is the old gospel, the one preached by the Apostles, the one defined in 1 Corinthians 15, the one summarized later in The Apostles’ Creed.

“But what you call the New Gospel is not a substitute for the old gospel. We still believe all that stuff.”

Ok, but why don’t you say it? And not just privately to your friends or on a statement of faith somewhere, but in public? You don’t have to be meaner, but you do have to be clearer. You don’t have to unload the whole truck of systematic theology on someone, but to leave the impression that hell is no big deal is so un-Jesus like (Matt. 10:26-33). And when you don’t talk about the need for faith and repentance you are very un-apostolic (Acts 2:38; 16:31).

“But we are just building bridges. We are relating to the culture first, speaking in a language they can understand, presenting the parts of the gospel that make the most sense to them. Once we have their trust and attention, then we can disciple and teach them about sin, repentance, faith and all the rest. This is only pre-evangelism.”

Yes, it’s true, we don’t have to start our conversations where we want to end up. But does the New Gospel really prime the pump for evangelism or just mislead the non-Christian into a false assurance? It’s one thing to open a door for further conversation. It’s another to make Christianity so palatable that it sounds like something the non-Christian already does. And this is assuming the best about the New Gospel, that underneath there really is a desire to get the old gospel out.

Paul’s approach with non-Christians in Athens is instructive for us (Acts 17:16-34). First, Paul is provoked that the city is so full of idols (16). His preaching is not guided by his disappointment with other Christians, but by his anger over unbelief. Next, he gets permission to speak (19-20). Paul did not berate people. He spoke to those who were willing to listen. But then look at what he does. He makes some cultural connection (22-23, 28), but from there he shows the contrast between the Athenian understanding of God and the way God really is (24-29). His message is not about a way of life, but about worshiping the true God in the right way. After that, he urges repentance (30), warns of judgment (31), and talks about Jesus’ resurrection (31).

The result is that some mocked (32). Who in the world mocks the New Gospel? There is nothing not to like. There is no scandal in a message about lame Christians, a loving God, changing the world, and how most of us are most likely not going to hell. This message will never be mocked, but Paul’s Mars Hill sermon was. And keep in mind, this teaching in Athens was only an entre into the Christian message. This was just the beginning, after which some wanted to hear him again (32). Paul said more in his opening salvo than some Christians ever dare to say. We may not be able to say everything Paul said at Athens all at once, but we certainly must not give the impression in our “pre-evangelism” that repentance, judgment, the necessity of faith, the importance of right belief, the centrality of the cross and the resurrection, the sinfulness of sin and the fallenness of man–the stuff that some suggest will be our actual evangelism–are outdated relics of a mean-spirited, hurtful Christianity.

A Final Plea

Please, please, please, if you are enamored with the New Gospel or anything like it, consider if you are really being fair with your fellow Christians in always throwing them under the bus. Consider if you are preaching like Jesus did, who called people, not first of all to a way of life, but to repent and believe (Mark 1:15). And as me and my friends consider if we lack the necessary patience and humility to speak tenderly with non-Christians, consider if your God is a lopsided cartoon God who never takes offense at sin (because sin is more than just un-neighborliness) and never pours out wrath (except for the occasional judgment against the judgmental). Consider if you are giving due attention to the cross and the Lamb of God who died there to take away the sin of the world. Consider if your explanation of the Christian message sounds anything like what we hear from the Apostles in the book of Acts when they engage the world.

This is no small issue. And it is not just a matter of emphasis. The New Gospel will not sustain the church. It cannot change the heart. And it does not save. It is crucial, therefore, that our evangelical schools, camps, conferences, publishing houses, and churches can discern the new gospel from the old.

Technorati Tags: Emerging Church

more on manhattan

"Great damage has been done to the cause of Christ by those who have sought to promote the Kingdom by compromising the gospel, the only power given to the church that can change hearts, and hence change societies." - James White in his The Troubling Aspects of the Manhattan Declaration.

I wholeheartedly agree with that statement and I also agree with other points made by White ... but not enough (in this case) to say I should not have signed.

wii for christians

HT:BH

Technorati Tags: humor

male female

I'm a complementarian. I understand egalitarians - I just don't agree.

But there's another group I don't understand, for conversation, let's call them "morons". These can be found in both of the aforementioned groups. One of these guys, who happens to be in the egalitarian camp, recently wrote, "And my bullshit detector went off because I couldn’t help but think, 'It’s kind of convenient that all the book[s] about submission are written by guys?'"

I don't know which irks me more, that this guy equates complementarianism with some kind of perverted male dominance position or that because books are written by men they should be discounted. Interestingly he lists several great books on the topic but clearly hasn't read them because he thinks they are talking about male over female rule. As with other distortions of truth this guy makes elsewhere in his blog, he cites his unfortunate upbringing as proof that the positions he opposes must be wrong. He's convinced that his sad childhood accurately reflects these positions and he ignores any reference by those on the other side which confronts the kind of error he grew up with.

Of course his commenters aren't much brighter, one writes, "Unfortunately, there *are* books by women promoting the 'male headship' weirdness. That's always seemed tragic to me - women encouraging other women into such dysfunction."

But why am I on about this now? I just read Jeff Robinson's Q&A with Dorothy Patterson. You can go read that if you'd like but the point is that here's an intelligent woman who is part of my "weirdness" crowd ... and it's easy to see why ... she thinks Scripture means what it teaches. I guess she doesn't understand that the experience of the blogger I'm referring to above, especially with his fine-tuned bullshit detector, should trump Scripture.

Technorati Tags: women

manhattan declaration

I signed the Manhattan Declaration ...

Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.

We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are:

• the sanctity of human life
• the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
• the rights of conscience and religious liberty.

Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.


Download the declaration here ...

time

Patience and perseverance (James 5.7-11) ...

i had a birthday

I had a birthday last week, my 48th ... Psa 90.10, 12 ...

I've lived 17,532 days. If I live according to Psalm 90.10, I have between 8,035 and 11,323 left. Am I living them right? One thing for sure, while I thought they should get easier, they have not. Lord grant me strength.

abi

Technorati Tags: Calvinism, humor

scam v. scammers

Ok - just because there are scammers among the manmade global warming crowd doesn't prove the theory is a scam ... but ... it reinforces that what many have taken as scientific fact simply has not been proven and there is unreconciled evidence to the contrary.



And on the lighter side ...

Technorati Tags: current events

stockdale paradox

"This is a very important lesson. You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end—which you can never afford to lose—with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.”

Listen to James C. Collins tell of his conversation with James Stockdale regarding his coping as a Vietnamese POW. Click on The Stockdale Paradox.

Technorati Tags: leadership

conscience competence

I learned the Conscious Competence ladder today ...



Level 1 - Unconscious Incompetence
(You Don't Know that You Don't Know)
At this level you are blissfully ignorant: You have a complete lack of knowledge and skills in the subject in question. On top of this, you are unaware of this lack of skill, and your confidence may therefore far exceed your abilities.
Level 2 - Conscious Incompetence
(You Know that You Don't Know)
At this level you find that there are skills you need to learn, and you may be shocked to discover that there are others who are much more competent than you. As you realize that your ability is limited, your confidence drops. You go through an uncomfortable period as you learn these new skills when others are much more competent and successful than you are.
Level 3 - Conscious Competence 
(You Know that You Know)
At this level you acquire the new skills and knowledge. You put your learning into practice and you gain confidence in carrying out the tasks or jobs involved. You are aware of your new skills and work on refining them.
You are still concentrating on the performance of these activities, but as you get ever-more practice and experience, these become increasingly automatic.
Level 4 - Unconscious Competence 
(You Don't Know that You Know - It Just Seems Easy!)
At this level your new skills become habits, and you perform the task without conscious effort and with automatic ease. This is the peak of your confidence and ability.

Technorati Tags: leadership

Freedom from Self-Preservation

Ray Ortlund on Freedom from Self-Preservation

Peter denied Jesus, to preserve himself physically (Mark 14:66-72). Later he denied the gospel, to preserve himself socially (Galatians 2:11-21). But by the time he wrote his first letter, his heart had been set free: “I have written briefly to you, exhorting and declaring that this is the true grace of God. Stand firm in it” (1 Peter 5:12).

What is “the true grace of God”? Not survival, physical or social, but the privilege of sharing in Christ’s sufferings that we may also rejoice when his glory is revealed (1 Peter 4:13). Whatever life thrusts upon us, the true grace of God is to stand firm in that hard place and embrace identification with Jesus.

HT:PC

mercy

“Mercy is a command of God, yet it cannot simply be a response to a demand. It must arise out of hearts made generous and gracious by an understanding and experience of God’s mercy. It is the hearts of the congregation that must be melted until they ask, “Where is my neighbor?” ~ Tim Keller, Ministries of Mercy, p 135

the gospel

"The law cannot create faith because it tells us what is to be done. It can only announce to those who transgress it what they have not done; consequently, it brings despair in its wake.

The promise [of the gospel], by contrast, tells us what has been done by someone else. That is why it brings life.

Once the law's just sentence has been satisfied in Christ, it is no longer our executioner, but instead plots the course for our gospel-driven life...."

-- Michael Horton, "The Gospel-Driven Life" p. 139

same old opposition

"In every generation, Christians face opposition to the word of God that they profess. Sometimes the attacks are subtle. Sometimes they are not. The issues vary, but the opposition from the enemy does not. His line of attack is ancient: "Hath God really said?" (Gen 3:1). Has God really said that there is only one way of salvation? Has God really said that you cannot serve God and your money? Has God really said that you shouldn't lust after that woman who is not your wife? And the attacks go on and on." ~ Denny Burk

Technorati Tags: Scripture

gw haox

Well, it's not final, and I'm sure someone will find some way around this, but for those of you that continue to insist global warming isn't a hoax, it's getting harder for you.

Technorati Tags: current events

whiplashing

I'm 50/50 (qualitatively speaking, not quantitative) on what Ken Silva claims as true. That is, I think his quotes are technically correct but he makes links and implications that I don't always see. In that, and due to his general 'tone', to me, he comes across as harsh and unhelpful. Even when I agree with his point, it takes a bit of effort to weed through the rhetoric to get to the issue he is exposing. From my vantage point, I see more harm than good.

One of the harms is that he has created a backlash. I see some who defend those Silva attacks not because they agree with the person or group but because they are driven to be a defender. While I think this is noble, I don't understand why they jettison truth along the way. Others embrace the accused because they simply do not want to be associated with the ugliness they perceive among Silva's ilk. Sadly, they haven't sorted out that truth can still be upheld in a loving way.

Coincidently, I just read Silva's QUEERMERGENT ADELE SAKLER AND EMERGENT VILLAGE while a friend of mine just did an on-line interview with Adele Sakler. In Silva's post, he rightly builds on the postmodern innovator's rejection of knowable truth. For some reason, because we cannot know all truth the postmodern has decided we cannot know any truth. Since they now suppress the truth (Rom 1.18), it is a simple step for them to embrace sin (namely homosexuality - Rom 1.26-27).

Sakler boasts about McLaren, Rollins, and others who have helped her question Scripture and thereby enable her to embrace her sin.

In 1997 I moved to Los Angeles and began living a double life as a Christian and as a gay woman. I began to read Brian McLaren and found him writing things I had felt inside but was very afraid to express outwardly to anyone. In 2002 I went to Northern Ireland to do a DTS (Discipleship Training School) with YWAM.

I met the great Peter Rollins and we developed a great friendship. His teachings and writings on postmodernism and Christianity radically shaped how I viewed my faith. I could no longer hang onto certainty with regards to interpreting scripture. (Online source)

Sakler writes more:

Evangelicals are hyper-concerned with pointing out how being queer is a sin, and that the Bible explicitly denounces homosexual acts. Trust me, I get it all firsthand. But I’m not buying the rhetoric. I disagree with what I have come to consider outmoded and out-of-context religious interpretations. (Online source)

That caused me to wonder if I am "hyper-concerned" with this but then I realized, only in reaction to the onslaught of ideas trying to pervert God's truth. I do not seek these out. I do not mention it except when I find it in the course of my normal reading. And these days it seems the attack on Biblical truth is everywhere.

Note Sakler's enlightened state. The position that homosexuality is sin is to her "rhetoric", outmoded and out-of-context religious interpretations. Wow.

But now to my friend's interview with Sakler. In fairness, I stopped 34 minutes into the 71 minute interview but I didn't sense it was going to change course. In the interview I hear my friend say some concerning things. I sense he desperately wants to model the heart of Jesus but in doing so made some off-target points.

First my friend is learning to "love people without an agenda" because "Jesus accepted me as I am". While I get the 'spirit' behind this he misses the point. Yes Jesus loved him, suffered and died for him while he was still a rebel sinner. But Jesus had a clear agenda, he did this to (among other things) redeem us from lawlessness, to purify us, and make us zealous for good works (Titus 2.14). Jesus then instructed us to do the same. That is, go love the sinner but do so with an agenda (Matt 28.19).

My friend's message is that love is unconditional but he confused unconditional love with us not having a mission, i.e., an ultimate goal. He reinforced this wrong thinking by stating that we all have "junk in our lives" and spoke at length about sin in the church which he and Sakler (1) identified as hypocrisy and (2) as justifying homosexually as consistent with Christian living.

First, yes we have sin. Even as the redeemed, we sadly still sin. But we call it that. We do not embrace it and state that it is who we are - lashing out at those that dare call it sin. My friend infers this by calling it "junk". But the homosexual is not calling homosexuality "junk". They are saying it is ok. Why my friend misses this is beyond me.

Contrary to 1 Cor 6.9-10, my friend and Sakler believe there is nothing inconsistent with "being gay and having a relationship with Jesus." Sakler states that "no one can judge me except God" and that she is "saved by grace". God has already spoken on the matter in if she were saved by grace (which is the only way for all of us), then she would see that. She would read 1 Cor 6.11 as a promise not as "outmoded and out-of-context religious interpretations" used by fundamentalists to beat up others.

Second, it's interesting that they want to say that the homosexual "Christian" deserves kindness and understanding but the Christian struggling with some other sin is "hypocritical". So are these things sin or not? And is the person in sin struggling or hypocritical?

Finally, if I'm struggling with sin, it seems they would have me embrace it rather than speak out against it. Does that make me a hypocrite? Well, that depends on my heart. If I'm honestly wrestling to overcome and simply speaking God's truth on the matter, than no, I'm not. But they don't seem to see this.

Sakler proclaims in regard to her homosexuality, "I'm great with it and fine with it ... and God embraces me ... I'm the happiest that I've ever been." She throws out the Bible as a story that has and needs to change through the generations and accepts her 'story' as the truth - the error of the postmodern (although not new at all) mind.

I could go on but it's basically more of the same. Bottom line, I get - and respect - my friend's compassion. But I'm deeply concerned with his ultimate approach to this sin. In contrast, I also just read John Starke's An Open Letter to Adele: A Response to Queermergent. I found Starke most compassionate in that he spoke kindly yet upheld truth. To speak kindly at the cost of truth is not compassion, it is fear.

Starke challenges Sakler (and McLaren and Rollins) with, "We should not base our knowledge on what we can know but what God has made known to us.

In response to Sakler saying, "There were more important things in kingdom living than where we go after we pass from this world to the next, like poverty, AIDS, the environment, etc." Starke writes:

I believe you have made an "over-correction" to the Church's neglect of these social concerns. There are "other" important things in kingdom living like poverty, AIDS, etc, but the ultimate remedy to these things is the hope that we have in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not our efforts to remedy them in this life. Just the simple truth of "what does a man gain if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?" should speak loudly to this. If we look to remedy the poor and sick without remedying their sinful condition, we have only prolonged their suffering.

I agree with him. And I love his closing challenge:

Please repent and stop what you are doing and approving of at Queermergent. Consider the consequences of your practices and your hearty approval of the practices of others. You say, "About 2.5 years ago I FINALLY came to terms with my sexuality. I found peace with myself and with God." Finding peace with God is not coming to terms with yourself and concluding what is or is not acceptable in life. Finding peace with God is only found in the Gospel - the forgiveness of our sins through the cross of Jesus Christ (Romans 5:1). Please don't abandon the Gospel. The peace, reconciliation, love, and community you and others are blogging about at Queermergent can be found at local any YMCA or community center. The peace, reconciliation, love, and community you speak about is not Christian, because it is not centered around what God has done on our behalf. The hope for change from homosexuality and any sin in this life is not to (as you put it) "pray the gay away" or even making your best effort to be straight. But the hope for change is found in trusting in the power of the Gospel because it is the power of God.

I encourage my friend to continue in love but to add a balance of truth.

Technorati Tags: Emerging Church, homosexuality

marriage and christ

"Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her" (Ephesians 5.25)

When we befriend the world we are adulterers (James 4.4). The image of Christ and His Church as a marriage union is an important one and is reflected in human marriage. It is a mystery and has only one proper manifestation (pure, love-based, male-female, etc., Eph 4, Gen 2.24). Marriage is meant to make Christ's love for his people more visible in the world (Eph 5.32). There is only one true love and it is found in and through Christ alone.