Feb 4
To R. Scott Clark and his blogpost article on how strictly an officer in the conservative Reformed and Presbyterian denominations hold to the standard confessions and catechisms such as the Westminster Standards. This appeared in Heidelblog.
From my conversations with people, there is wider disagreement with the Standards than are are outwardly expressed. Here we should note that despite the fact that no one is holding a literal gun to their heads to keep them silent. But how many non-literal guns can exist in this context?
However, the key issue that revolves around strict subscription to the Standards is left unmentioned in the article above. Mark 7 touches on that issue. At what point does a required subscription to the Standards make a group like the Pharisees from that chapter in Mark? Jesus rightfully accused the Pharisees of substituting their traditions for the Scriptures. That occurred when they placed their traditions on too high a pedestal.
So, in essence, the Westminster Standards are to us what the traditions of the Pharisees were to them. And the more strict subscription to those standards is required, the more it reveals the pedestal on which we have placed those standards. And the question becomes for us, how much do we want to imitate the Pharisees in substituting something man-made for what was God-breathed?
BTW, at least those who first defined Christian Fundamentalism in order to distinguish authentic Christianity from liberal theology stuck to a small, and rightfully selected, number of essentials.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The comment below is based on the 2nd audio clip on the webpage.
To W. Robert Godfrey and his recorded adult class lesson on how the abandoning of Christendom has some very negative marks on the world today. This appeared in the Abounding Grace Radio blog.
Regarding Godfrey's lesson, the problem is that while Godfrey speaks to the recent disorientation of Christians to a world that is changing from revolving around Christendom to another view of reality. But the problem is that not all have experienced Christendom as something positive. The LGBT community has been harshly persecuted under Christendom. In America, Christendom promoted white supremacy. In the world, Christendom justified colonialism and imperialism. In Europe, there were religious wars and harsh religious persecutions. Under Christendom, women had to live as 2nd class citizens in America for a long time. And reversals to these abuses and atrocities are not being associated with the promotion of Christendom but with the abandoning of Christendom. And so while Christians are experiencing disorientation because of the changing of the guard in terms of how the world and life are interpreted, others are experiencing some levels of liberation with the end of Christendom.
And while Godfrey uses Stalin to show the negative implications of what Marx said, he neglected the details that show that Stalin was not a Marxist. And for all of Marx's faults and errors, what Godfrey attributes to Marx ain't necessarily so. Similarly, Hitler is not the logical result of abandoning Christendom especially when his anti-Semitism was, in large part, a result of centuries of European Christian anti-Semitism. After all, today we see a post Christian Europe that is far different in positive ways than what we saw when it was under Christendom.
Yes, a lot of today's thinking is horrible and threatening. But if we ignore the bad fruits that our religious ancestors produced through Christendom, we will not see Christianity's, and by Christianity I am referring to Christians, contributions to today's bad fruit and thus we will have no credibility when challenging the current ways of the world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The comment below is based on the 1st audio clip on the webpage..
Feb 5
To Chris Gordon and his adult Church lesson on sexuality in which he addresses homosexuality and gender identity. This appeared in the Abounding Grace Radio blog.
It's not that Chris Gordon's answers to the sexual orientation and gender identity issues of today are wrong, it is that by sticking solely with the Heidelberg Catechism and the Scriptures, he has a turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to many of the struggles people are experiencing with these issues. He is basically saying that while he doesn't need to listen to the life experiences of people whose sexual orientation and gender identity are unbiblical, but they need to listen to him. And that serves somewhat of a microcosm of the Conservative Church's response to people today.
BTW, life tells us that there are more than 2 biological sexes today. Those who are born as intersex comprise another biological sex. And the problem there is that because of the percentage of people who are born that way, many of us conservative Christians want to think as if that does not happen. That is our preference until one knows someone or has a friend who is intersex and has listened to the problems they face.
In terms of gender identity, it seems that many in the LGBT community and many conservatives who feel anxious by the presence of those from that community share the same fault; they conflate biological sex with gender identity. While the former is a physical, biological reality, the other is a psycho-social reality. In addition, while we know somewhat of what nature says based on the outward evidence of one's biological sex, we don't know what nature is saying on the inside. And since the biological reality of our sex and our gender identity are not identical, we need to recognize the complexity of the issue of one's gender identity. Here it might be useful to study the Native American tribes that recognized up to 5 genders, though those gender identities are not necessarily parallel to what we see in our culture today, and they honored those who held to a different gender identity than what they were born with as people whose spirit conquered their flesh. BTW, the triumph of the Spirit over the flesh is something we celebrate from a different perspective.
In addition, what many people are referring to when they speak of liberation today is the liberation from society's attempts to marginalize them for their differences. And American Christianity, in contrast to how Rosaria Butterfield's pastor friend treated her, has played a prominent role in promoting harsh attempts at marginalizing people from the LGBT community by society.
As for sexual orientation, here we should note the prevalence of homosexuality in the animal kingdom. So what is nature telling us about homosexuality, and for many, their sexual preferences?
Finally, we should note that when Paul condemns homosexuality in Romans 1, he follows that up with the stern warning not to judge others in Romans 2. Why? It is because we believers in God can identify with those sinning unbelievers from Romans 1 because of our own sins. And so we should be describing this issues not as observers who are reluctantly and from a distance viewing horrible acts of some alien species, but as fellow sinners. We should also note that we have multiple identities. We have a new identity in Christ, but we still have an identity with the tax collector from the parable of the 2 men praying. We can easily identify with that tax collector unless, of course, we prefer to find our identity with the Pharisee from that same parable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feb 5
To R. Scott Clark and Brad Isabell for Clark's quoting of Isabell's article on the riff between the Side B Movement and the traditionalists in the PCA over church participation by those Christians in the Side B Movement. Clark quotes part of Isabell's article in his blogpost on Heidelblog.
Isabell's full article can be found at:
https://www.reformation21.org/blog/a-word-on-narratives
I've commented on this before here. It seems that there are errors made by both sides on the issue of whether being SSA but celibate disqualifies a person fr0m serving as.a church officer. Overtures #23 and #37 certainly introduce a hierarchy between heterosexuals and homosexuals who don't act on unbiblical desires. And a contributing motivation for that hierarchy could be homophobia for sure. But that's could be and so assuming support for those overtures implies homophobia is wrong and an overreaction.
At the same time, one must understand the historical context for such an accusation. There are people who are emerging from centuries of societal marginalization of homosexuals. Defensiveness and a hyper level of oversensitivity are normal reactions to long standing social injustices and persecution. And the normality of those reactions is often hidden when people are so wrapped up in their theology that they forget what it means to be a person. After all, theology is not substitute for experience; rather, it is to provide an important aid in how we structure and interpret our experiences. Unfortunately, some believe otherwise.
Instead of a peaceful and Biblical resolution to the debate, there will be nothing more than continued strife, the demonization of others, and self-righteous posturing by those on both sides unless both sides realize their own errors and the unbiblical way in which they are reacting to others.
No comments:
Post a Comment