Calling the Bluff of Moral Relativists

“A great many modern people cling to the protection of views which are not merely false, but incoherent. For instance, they dogmatically insist that truth cannot be known, all the while supposing that what they say is true. Once upon a time it was enough to point out the incoherency—to call attention to the obvious. No longer. Today the reply is likely to be, ‘I’m incoherent, but so what? I don’t need coherency, and I can do without meaning.’ I answer, ‘I don’t believe you, because we both know that the longing for meaning and coherency is deep-set in every mind, including yours. The real question, then, is this: What is it that is so important to you that you are willing to give up even meaning, even coherency to have it?’”

--J. Budziszewski, The Revenge of Conscience

 

Allah and the Son of God

Trevin Wax interviews Collin Hansen and J.D. Greear about issues facing Christians as we seek to do missions among Muslims in Muslim cultures. This will give you a good handle on some of the current controversial issues.

http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2011/02/10/islam-and-contextualization-a-conversation-with-collin-hansen-j-d-greear/

Imperialism, Racism, and Sexism

"Imperialism, sexism, and racism are words of Western coinage, not because the West invented these evils, which are alas universal, but because the West recognized and named and condemned them as evils and struggled mightily- and not entirely in vain- to weaken their hold and to help their victims. If, to borrow a phrase, Western culture does indeed "go," imperialism, sexism, and racism will not go with it. More likely casualties will be the freedom to denounce them and the effort to end them.

It may be that Western culture will indeed go: The lack of conviction of many of those who should be its defenders and the passionate intensity of its accusers may well join to complete its destruction. But if it does go, the men and women of all the continents will thereby be impoverished and endangered" 

--Bernard Lewis, Cultures in Conflict (closing paragraphs)

 

When Will Jesus Return?

This passage from George Ladd was recently quoted by David Platt in his excellent sermon on the sovereignty and God and global missions. It concerns Matthew 24:13, in which Jesus says, "And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come" (Matthew 24:14 ESV).

This statement has often raised questions like "Does this mean Jesus can't come back yet?" "How will we know when all nations have been reached?" "Can we know?" etc. Without dismissing them, Ladd cuts through those questions in this statement:

God alone knows the definition of terms. I cannot precisely define who all the nations are. Only God knows the exact meaning to evangelize. He alone will know when that goal is fulfilled. But I do not need to know. I know only one thing: Christ has not yet returned; therefore, the task is not yet done. When it is done, Christ will come. Our responsibility is not to insist on defining the terms; our responsibility is to complete the task. So long as Christ does not return, our work is undone. Let us get busy and complete our mission.

-George Eldon Ladd, The Gospel of the Kingdom (1959 A.D.)

 

Kevin DeYoung on "Hiding Above the Fray"

Good little post by DeYoung. Good counsel for pastors and politicians.

Hiding Above the Fray

I’m not saying their positions are always wrong, but their position on their positions makes me nervous. I’m talking about those pastors, politicians, pundits, and publications which, at the first sign of firefight, always scramble for the cleanest spot above the fray.

The ones that always claim to transcend old polarities. The ones that always claim to be above all the silly nonsense that used to drag us down. The ones that keep their noses clean by putting them high into air. The ones that are never dirty enough for the trenches.

Why not get shot at with the rest of us? Are there not right sides to be on in some battles? Or do you not want us to see that you are at war as much as everyone else?

I get nervous when the middle ground is always the safe spot. I wonder if the two sides are being described fairly. Or if there are really twenty sides instead of two. I wonder if the sane voice of civility crying in the uncouth wilderness has something it doesn’t want me to hear. I wonder if instead of getting an intellectual argument for the truth I’m getting an emotional appeal to feel superior than the lowbrow rabble-rousers. I am skeptical of those whose first instinct in the midst of theological, political, or cultural controversy is to plead with everyone that there doesn’t have to be a controversy.

I have no desire to turn every skirmish into a war. There is more to life than belligerence. But there is also more to life than boasting of civility when battles need to be won. When the Bible tells us to seek the things that are above, it doesn’t always mean the fray.

http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2012/05/04/hiding-above-the-fray/

Andy Stanley and Homosexuality--A Need for Clarity

Al Mohler is the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and Andy Stanley is the pastor of North Point Community Church in Atlanta (and the son of famous pastor/teacher Charles Stanley). Mohler wrote the following piece yesterday, describing a recent sermon illustration Stanley used.

"A shot now reverberating around the evangelical world was fired by Atlanta megachurch pastor Andy Stanley in recent days. Preaching at North Point Community Church, in a sermon series known as “Christian,” Stanley preached a message titled “When Gracie Met Truthy” on April 15, 2012. With reference to John 1:14, Stanley described the challenge of affirming grace and truth in full measure. He spoke of grace and truth as a tension, warning that “if you resolve it, you give up something important.”

The message was insightful and winsome, and Andy Stanley is a master communicator. Early in the message he spoke of homosexuals in attendance, mentioning that some had shared with him that they had come to North Point because they were tired of messages in gay-affirming churches that did nothing but affirm homosexuality.

Then, in the most intense part of his message, Stanley told the congregation an account meant to illustrate his message. He told of a couple with a young daughter who divorced when the wife discovered that the husband was in a sexual relationship with another man. The woman then insisted that her former husband and his gay partner move to another congregation. They did move, but to another North Point location, where they volunteered together as part of a “host team.” The woman later told Andy Stanley that her former husband and his partner were now involved as volunteers in the other congregational location.

The story took a strange turn when Stanley then explained that he had learned that the former husband’s gay partner was still married. Stanley then explained that the partner was actually committing adultery, and that the adultery was incompatible with his service on a host team. Stanley told the two men that they could not serve on the host team so long as the one man was still married. He later told of the former wife’s decision not to live in bitterness, and of her initiative to bring the whole new family structure to a Christmas service. This included the woman, her daughter, her former husband, his gay partner, and his daughter. Stanley celebrated this new “modern family” as an expression of forgiveness.

He concluded by telling of Christ’s death for sinners and told the congregation that Jesus does not condemn them, even if they cannot or do not leave their life of sin.

Declaring the death of Christ as atonement for sin is orthodox Christianity and this declaration is essential to the Gospel of Christ. The problem was that Stanley never mentioned faith or repentance — which are equally essential to the Gospel. There is indeed no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, but this defines those who have acted in repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21). As for those who are not in Christ, they stand condemned already (John 3:18).

The most puzzling and shocking part of the message was the illustration and the account of the homosexual couple, however. The inescapable impression left by the account was that the sin of concern was adultery, but not homosexuality. Stanley clearly and repeatedly stressed the sin of adultery, but then left the reality of the homosexual relationship between the two men unaddressed as sin. To the contrary, he seemed to normalize their relationship. They would be allowed to serve on the host team if both were divorced. The moral status of their relationship seemed to be questioned only in terms of adultery, with no moral judgment on their homosexuality.

Was this intended as a salvo of sorts? The story was so well told and the message so well constructed that there can be little doubt of its meaning. Does this signal the normalization of homosexuality at North Point Community Church? This hardly seems possible, but it appeared to be the implication of the message. Given the volatility of this issue, ambiguity will be replaced by clarity one way or the other, and likely sooner than later.

We can only hope that Andy Stanley and the church will clarify and affirm the biblical declaration of the sinfulness of homosexual behavior, even as he preaches the forgiveness of sin in any form through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. His affirmation of grace and truth in full measure is exactly right, but grace and truth are not actually in tension. The only tension is our finite ability to act in full faithfulness. The knowledge of our sin is, in truth, a gift of grace. And grace is only grace because of the truth of what God has done for us in Christ.And yet, even as we know this is true, we also know that the Christian church has often failed miserably in demonstrating grace to those who struggle with same-sex attractions and those who are involved in homosexual behaviors. We have treated them as a special class of sinners and we have assured ourselves of our moral superiority. The Gospel of Jesus Christ destroys that pretension and calls for us to reach out to all sinners with the message of the Gospel, declaring the forgiveness of sins in Christ and calling them to faith and repentance.

The Gospel is robbed of its power if any sinner or any sin is declared outside its saving power. But the Gospel is also robbed of its power if sin — any sin — is minimized to any degree.What does Andy Stanley now believe about homosexuality and the church’s witness? We must pray that he will clarify the issues so graphically raised in his message, and that he will do so in a way the unambiguously affirms the Bible’s clear teachings — and that he will do so precisely because he loves sinners enough to tell them the truth — all the truth — about both our sin and God’s provision in Christ. Biblical faithfulness simply does not allow for the normalization of homosexuality. We desperately want all persons to feel welcome to hear the Gospel and, responding in faith and repentance, to join with us in mutual obedience to Christ. But we cannot allow anyone, ourselves included, to come to Christ — or to church — on our own terms."

--Al Mohler, "Is the Megachurch the New Liberalism?" 

Social Drinking and Weak Consciences

D.A. Carson comments on 1 Corinthians 8:12-13, which reads

"When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again, lest I make my brother stumble.

(1 Corinthians 8:12-13)

"There are two elements in this spiritual counsel that must be understood.

First, the kind of situation Paul is facing here must not be confused with quite a different one. Suppose you are a Christians who, owing to you r cultural background, has always engaged in social drinking. Now you move into a circle that is more socially conservative. Some senior saint comes up to you and says, 'I have to tell you that I am offended by your drinking. Paul tells us that if anyone is offended by what you do, you must stop it. I'm offended; you must therefore stop your drinking." How would you respond?

This senior saint is simply manipulating you. He (or she) is not a person with a weak conscience who is in danger of tippling on the side because of your example, and thus wounding his weak conscience. Far from it. If he sees you drinking again he will likely denounce you in the most unrestrained terms. In his eyes, he is the stronger person, not the weaker. In other words, this case is not at all like the one the apostle had to deal with. Indeed, you might be wise to tell him, 'I'm sorry to hear that you have such a weak conscience.' He will probably be so unclear as to what you mean that he may actually leave you alone for a couple of weeks.

To develop a modern example somewhat akin to what Paul faces, we would have to change the story somewhat. Now you have become a youth sponsor in a church. Some of the young people from socially conservative homes see you drinking and, against the conscience they have developed over such matters, follow suit; in time they become sloppy about all kinds of serious moral issues. You have thus become party to their substantial destruction."

--D.A. Carson,  The Cross in Christian Ministry