Why – oh why – do we never learn.
“No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”
My prediction: September 22 will arrive on schedule, no worse for the wear. (Though maybe a woot-off if we’re lucky)
This entry was posted
on Monday, September 21st, 2009 at 12:31 am and is filed under What Can You Say?.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
![Image of The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31Jl6fhDLxL._SL75_.jpg "The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith")
88 Comments(+Add)
Oh, dear Lord, someone actually took the time to type all that garbage up? A valiant effort if nothing else, I have to admit.
And it probably is nothing else. So… a valiant effort!
Ya, and he didn’t even take the time to validate the HTML code:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.flash.net%2F~evt%2Frapture.htm&charset=(detect+automatically)&doctype=Inline&group=0
result: 13376 Errors
Me thinks never seen such bad code before in life
. So much for valiant effort.
WOOT(off)
I don’t want to be nit-picky… oh wait, yes I do. A global EMP would not throw the world back into the stone age. There are still great parts of the world that are not so reliant on technology as we are. Secondly, if something isn’t on, it wouldn’t get fried. Sheesh, don’t these people watch any movies?
Also, the world demand for food has not “out stripped” what farmers can grow. Farmers in this country alone can grow enough grain for the entire world. Our government still pays farmers to NOT plant crops.
This is fun.
Wow. What the hell was that!?!?!
I know the mere mention of Peter Rollins creates a divide. But he wrote a parable where those who were so eager to get out of here got their wish and were whisked away. And those who heard the call of the gospel chose to stay and minister alongside Christ to those who were “left behind” and hurting and needing the touch of Christ.
It is important to note that when God speaks in this parable, He is speaking to the church. I missed that the first time I read it and it does make a difference. The “admin” in the comment thread is Peter Rollins.
Here are the characters:
Okay, I messed that up a bit. I tried to post two links.
The one above is the parable
Here are the characters:
I give up.
Nathanael – what are you trying to post?
There was another link on Peter Rollins citing introducing the characters of the tract he is writing on the rapture.
What, today? That’s good, I never did like Monday mornings very much…
If you can just post the link as text, I’ll try to hotlink it for you later today…
Did you mean “to those who were “left behind” and lost and needing the redemption of Christ.”?
BTW – I have never met someone who believes in the pre-trib rapture who has moved to a mountain and stopped ministering to people, which is usually what is insinuated as one risidual aspect of that eschatalogical view. (I write this while wearing my official tin foil hat)
Rick,
What did you think of the parable?
I thought Peter Rollins was a heretic before….Now I know He is!
Way to go “Pastor”, you just turned every Christian who existed prior to 200 years ago into a heretic.
The rapture is a heresy.
PB, are you really serious? A parable is a story designed to teach a lesson. In this case, the lesson is that a Christian is not to hide away and wait for God to take them away from this place, but to serve and love as we follow the way of Jesus. He clearly is not laying out systematic theology. He is telling a thought-provoking story that you don’t have to agree with, but to declare him a heretic for telling a story is not a Christian attitude.
If you were to read Jesus’ parables this way, you would have to declare him to be a heretic too because clearly the kingdom of God is not a mustard seed, or a pile of yeast, or a net, or a pearl, and he calls lost people sheep and coins (but they’re actually people!!) etc. etc. etc.
Part of me feels guilty for bringing this to your attention, John. For now you’ve gone deeper into your self-constructed faith fort.
But I realize that I am not responsible for your accusations. So I’m free.
I just wish you would read that parable for what it is, a thought-provoking, stronghold-shaking fictional account, and that you wouldn’t use it to your own ends.
corey, you and I were typing at the same time.
well said.
I believe Peter Rollins is an ehertic and denies the faith once delivered to the saints. His “creative” parables are at odds with orthodox Christianity, and there are many “left behinders” who are at this very moment serving mankind acroos the world.
His disdain for those who genuinely espouse a rapture eschatology is in the same spirit that he suggests the orthodox crowd shows to him. His parable openly suggests “rapture people” will miss heaven?
It is has I have always said, many emergenst are no better in their self righteousness than those they attempt to dismantle. I, again, have never heard or read where Rollins ever teaches and places in spiritual context, the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. (If that is of any importance)
Anyone can use the metaphor of resurrection as a new way of living – the Jesus Seminar does that quite nicely. The cross has been largely ignored, and personal evangelism now means giving out sandwiches.
20,21,22
Peter Rollins is saying that those who the Bible says will not inherit the kingdom of God are actually God’s people! Jesus’ parables did not depart from scripture, they enhanced and explained it to those who had been given ears to hear.
James 4:4
You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.
2 Peter 1:4
by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire.
1 John 2:15-17
Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions—is not from the Father but is from the world. And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever.
Wake up.
Parable of the Lost Sheep – Jesus leaves the found to chase after the lost
#25 – Apples and oranges.
#25
Jesus knew the lost sheep was his. Those that are his will be retrieved and found, no matter where they wander.
Rollins and Bell have wandered afar off, and have yet to be retrieved.
Jn 17:13 “I am coming to you now, m but I say these things while I am still in the world, so that they may have the full measure of my joy n within them.
Jn 17:14 I have given them your word and the world has hated them, o for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. p
Jn 17:15 My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one.
Jn 17:16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of it.
Jn 17:17 Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth.
Jn 17:18 As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world.
Jn 17:19 For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified.
And more directly to this post:
Yeah, these guys are wrong for predicting dates, etc.
The teaching of the return of Christ is one which teaches us to be HOLY for HE is HOLY. and live as we ought, for the time is short.
Corey, what about the crown? Jesus, our soon coming King? Is he really calling people who are disobeying him by hiding in church home so he can hang out with those in rebellion against him here?
Read Matthew 24, those red letters, and hit me back on that one.
Jn 17:17 Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth.
Amen. Now crack it open and read it, and you will see clearly that Rollins is off the proverbial rocker on this one.
No one denies God’s purposes for us on this earth, but to suggest that a certain eschatological view means we miss Jesus is astounding. Why didn’t Jesus stay here then, He could have done so much.
As is his style, Rollins offers no gospel, only food banks and medicine. The Dali Lama offers those as well.
No one (even Rollins) is arguing that the eschatological perspective that he lays out in this parable is the way it is actually going to be. All he is trying to do is demonstrate that GOD CARES ABOUT LOST PEOPLE…to the point that we ought be tirelessly working among the lost that they might find salvation, even if that would mean laying aside our own salvation if a few more lost souls might find Christ (I think the apostle Paul said something about that…Rom. 9:3).
I see nothing in comment #32 with which most rapture people would disagree. Your interpretation of Rollin’s parable is generous at best and probably wishful thinking.
Corey, can you provide me with a link or two where Rollins openly teaches faith in Jesus through His death, burial, and resurrection. I’ll even accept a general treatise on how men are lost without Christ.
Taken for what it is, I thought that parable was pretty good and creative. I don’t think it was meant to represent a systematic theology or anything, but it does get a good point across. It reminds me of something Brennan Manning mentioned in his one book.
What the parable represents is that rapture people don’t care about people and men like Rollins really do and Jesus wants to be with them.
I give him an A for clandestine self righteousness.
I don’t know, I didn’t think it was very good (as a parable).
Mostly because it seems to have more of a “if you already disagree with me, you’ll hate my point and if you already agree with me, you’ll love my point” effect. A good parable leads the reader into viewing themselves as neutral, giving greater opportunity to understand, accept, and apply the lesson.
Can there be any more astonishing act of self righteousness than to suggest that some do not care for people like I do, and to openly suggest that Jesus wants to be with me?
This very moment there are men and women who look for the catching away to be with Jesus who are ministering in Africa among AIDs sufferers and other ministries that are not conference eye catchers and who do not sell books at churches. Rollins is no less a superstar darling than are Osteen and MacArthur. Everyone has their idol, and all of them profit from their notoriety.
#37
Rick, you don’t necessarily know that he would place himself with the people who serve and love. He might very well be condemning himself and recognizing that he would more often rather escape than engage the suffering in the world. Having spent some time with Peter, I can say that he is a very humble and thoughtful, very quick to acknowledge his own imperfection.
He also is not bashing people who believe in a rapture theology. He is not writing theology here. All he is doing is thoughtfully imagining a love that would sacrifice our own eternal bliss for the love of others.
Finally, though he writes books, he sells far too few to be put into the category of Osteen and MacArthur. He has been essentially homeless and unemployed for much of the past decade.
the sad thing, PB, that you probably don’t realize is that even if bell and rollins have “wandered off”…their “retrieval” won’t consist of admitting you and your ilk are right…about anything.
there’ll be no vindication for you, no fuel for your already over self-satisfied sense of “right-ness”.
and by that measure, you’re in much need of a retrieval all on your own.
Setting aside Rollins for the moment and just addressing Pastorboy’s assumptions:
Saying the “blessed hope” with “the rapture” that will “take his bride home to be with him” is but one way of looking at it.
Nowhere does Scripture call the rapture our blessed hope. Our hope is in the Lord’s return – if you see that as a partial return that allows believers to escape tribulation – so be it. Others may see one complete return.
This is not an issue on which we decide a person’s orthodox status.
Neil – Rollins’ parable was not to address the Scriptural pros or cons of eschatology. It was obviously meant to convey that people who espouse some sort of rapture do not care enough about people to stay and help them. And just to put an exclamation point on it, his parable states that Jesus Himself associates Himself with the “stayers”.
The implication is obvious.
Rick, I don’t think the implication is obvious at all. Again, knowing a little about how Rollins thinks, I would guess that the point of the parable is to ask ourselves how much we really love the lost and how much we would sacrifice for the lost, with the point being that most of us would find ourselves in the leaving camp rather than the staying camp. It’s meant to challenge all of us to be people of great love while recognizing that we are far more likely to fall short.
Corey – I could wholeheartedly embrace that concept and rebuke if I could ascertain the any concept of redemption through the gospel. And tell me what these words are any different than when Mike Ratliff suggests he knows the “mold of what a Christian looks like”.
Besides the open suggestion that rapture people are the goats, show me where he addresses the lostness of sinners and the gospel of redemption.
Rick, I’ll get you some quotes tomorrow. My Rollins book is at the office and I haven’t been over there today. One thing that I would say is that a big emphasis in his writings is that for Christianity to be real, it must be lived (not simply believed). And so much of his writing and many of his parables have to do with the idea of radically living the faith, not as a means of salvation but as authentic faith embodied in redeemed humanity. I don’t agree with him wholeheartedly on a lot of things. There are things he says that make me uncomfortable. There are places where I think he’s flat out wrong. But most of what he writes is not about how to be saved, it’s about people in process who are being saved and attempting to live it out faithfully.
I can embrace a call to moderate living. (Clairborne) I can embrace a call for humanitarian outreach. I can embrace a call for civility and humility. Etc., Etc..
But I still have not heard the gospel from Rollins, and if he does embrace justification by faith in Jesus Christ, then why does that not have a place in his speeches/writings?
I think the other thing I would say is that regardless of the specifics of his theology, regardless of whether he has the ‘right’ answers, can we listen to the questions he raises and grow in our own faith through them? Do we have to declare people that we disagree with the be demonic heretics (and I’m not saying you’re doing this…) or can we listen to people we disagree with and take what’s good and simply discard what’s bad?
RE 41:
As I said, I was not addressing Rollins’ parable – so I am not sure why you felt compelled to respond as if I were… my point was to address Pastorboy’s equating our blessed hope with the rapture.
And what does Bell have to do with this? Geesh, John, at times I think you just type without thinking, as if you have a quota to meet and you care not whether your references fit or are relevant.
You remind me of the smug who opposed William Carey by saying “Young man, if God wished to save the heathen he can do so without your help or mine.”
Salvation is the work of the spirit – yet WE are commanded to spread the good news, to make disciples, to be his instruments.
How you can read the Bible and deny God’s parallel interest in justice is beyond me. I guess you only see what you want to see.
Sometimes, but very selectively. It also depends upon what areas with which we disagree. I will issue the challenge for the third time. Someone please present me with a Rollin’s quote that clearly defines salvation by faith in Jesus alone.
That is my issue, I do not believe Rollins has a Biblical soteriology. That is a deal breaker for me, and should be for everyone regardless of his “thought provoking” creative parables.
******************
At the entrance to a certain bridge there were five people who were suffering from AIDs, and adding to their discomfort they had not eaten in a week. But like an angel from heaven, one man decided to help these five poor people. He brought them nurishing food, he helped them bathe, and he brought them medicine to ease their pain.
Now as this man helped these five people buses loaded with people kept passing by and crossing the bridge to the other side. Many buses stopped and asked the man if he desired those five people to get on the bus and cross the bridge. They told him that many people like the ones he was caring for were being cared for on the other side of the bridge. They warned him that it was widely believed that the bridge would soon be taken down, and that anyone left on this side would die, which would seem to ultimately countermand all his valiant efforts to help these people.
The man refused and said he wanted to continue to help these five people, and they were very grateful for his help. Bus load after bus laod passed them by and crossed the bridge. Finally God sent an angel to this man to show him where God had already asked everyone to cross the bridge. After listening to this angel read several parts of God’s Word that made it clear that God wanted everyone to cross the bridge that led to safety, the angel asked him one last time:
“Will you and the five others now cross to the other side of the bridge? You can bring all your food and medicine with you.”
The man, still feeding those five people, answered,
“You do not understand, go back and tell God we are already on the other side of the bridge.”
The angel shook his head in disbelief, astounded at such deception.
The site has been updated, apparently. It’s no longer September 21, but rather “Fall 2009.”
Just like with the ODMs themselves, I honestly can’t tell if that’s a stubborn faith or just a crass cynicism at work.
Rick,
You’ve made your point…several times.
But the fact remains that Mr. Rollins challenges me in my walking out my Christian faith. Regardless of whether you confirm his standing with God or not, I am going to keep on reading and being challenged by him.
He is not accountable to me regarding his profession of faith. I don’t even know the man. But I appreciate the perspective that he brings to the table.
Shalom
I am writing this from heaven. They have an extremely fast internet connection up here. One interesting thing here in heaven, I have not found one saint who didn’t practice sin while he was on earth.
Uh-oh, I gotta go, God wants me to answer for a couple of my blog posts that were off based.
I’ll drop by once in a while. Oh look, there’s John Calvin before God repenting profusely.
I really don’t understand what Rollins has to do with any of this other than the name of his parable was “The Rapture”. I had never really heard of him until maybe six months ago, and I still haven’t read any of his books. I guess from what I’ve read of him, I’ve not seen evidence to convince me he’s dangerous. It seems like the main thrust of his writing seems to fall along the lines of “faith without works is dead”, which is a pretty hard thing to argue with.
In a way, I think the phenomenon of trying to “pin down” what people exactly believe is so symptomatic of the West. Really, I can say I believe near anything if it’s untested, but a belief really doesn’t start meaning something unless it’s backed up by my real-life actions.
#50 – My challernge stands. I have no expectations of receiving an answer. I would have absolutely NO PROBLEM with Rollins if it were a call to works and the needs of people – if I could find his clear enounciation of the faith aspect of “faith without works”.
As usual, we are all predisposed to take the side we now stand and are adverse to a strong and impartial discussion of something as important as salvidic doctrine. To me that is a position of weakness and fear.
Phil,
The fault is mine. I posted the link because it was a stark contrast to the link in the OP. They want to get out of here. And Peter’s parable questioned the heart behind such intense focus on leaving.
That’s it.
I knew it would fuel certain fires that were already burning.
But my motives for linking it were purely to offer another perspective.
Nate – That is a colossal misrepresentation of people’s hearts. Of course there are wing nuts in any group, but I run with the rapture crowd and we hardly mention it. And my partner and I continue to feed African children, provide medicine to them, and support missionaries as well.
All the “left behinders” I run with are concerned with the earthly needs of people. So the false dichotomy is that you cannot preach the gospel of redemption AND care about the earthly needs of people.
Rick’s challenge raises two interesting questions as far as I am concerned.
1) How aligned does a person’s soteriology have to be, to appreciate what they have to say on unrelated topics?
2) How blatant or direct must that soteriological declaration be.
Rick has objected to Rollins based on his soteriology, while others have said that is not the issue… Rick has also called for a clear justification by faith statement from Rollins to prove/demonstrate what he believes. What if no statement exists, does that mean he does not believe it?
I raise the questions appart from Rollins himself – I do very little about him… and care even less.
I raise the question in a more philosophical sense. Can we learn, or be challenged, by heretics even? And how much of a person doctrinal statement must a person craft to be orthodox?
He must believe that Jesus was God in the flesh, died for our sins, and resurrected, and only by faith in Christ can a sinner inherit eternal life.
Everything else are different levels of importance. If Rollins had provided proof of the above, I would have no interest in discussing him. Remember, I am the man who believes a practicing homosexual can be a saved person. Top that!
Rick,
I too know a lot of people who assume the rapture will play out in a Left-Behind kinda way… and they are as you say.
On the other hand, just spend a little time at http://www.rr-bb.com and you will see a whole lotta folks whose obsession is escapism.
Couple that with comments like Pastorboy made on his blog about social justice and I see Rollins’ point.
I also agree he went too far with the whole goats and sheep thing…
I guess as far as this is concerned, I’m willing to take this as a given if someone calls themselves a Christian until it’s proven otherwise. For example, John Dominic Crossan calls himself a Christian, but explicitly denies these things, so in that case I would have some reason to doubt his profession of faith. It’s not that I’m making myself his judge, but I do wonder what exactly he has faith in.
I guess I find the need to have proof of everyone’s profession of faith strikes me a bit odd. I remember Christians saying the same type of thing about Bono, and even when he does give them proof, they still don’t believe him. I almost feel that we put people in no-win situations by demanding they prove themselves to us.
Maybe I’m just dense, but I fail to see in the context in which it was used how it’s offensive or inappropriate. I guess I see it more as a way to get a point across than anything else. It seems to me that a big point of a parable is to jostle people from their comfortable positions.
I guess Rick is assuming that an “Emergent” Christian would read that and think, “boy I’m glad I’m right and everyone else is wrong”. But, honestly, I didn’t read it that way at all. I read and was convicted of my own lack of action in living out what I say I believe.
Rick,
Call me a crazy optimist, but I choose to think the best of people and take them at their word.
Peter says he is a Jesus follower. I have yet to hear him say or read him write anything that contradicts his profession.
You are a Baptist pastor, and regularly include in your writings the clear path for someone to come to Christ.
Peter, from my perspective, is addressing the church, asking if our faith is being carried out by how we live.
I need that voice. Otherwise I become complacent. I need my spiritual world rocked from time to time, whether by a Baptist pastor or by a Irish heretic theologian.
I find Bono somewhat perplexing, but I find people who castigate him as unsaved interesting when the majority of orthodox evangelicalism practices hedonism and calls it “God’s blessings”.
Personally I would rather travel with Bono to Africa than with MacArthur on a Christian cruise. I would rather live with Clairborne than with Osteen.
“I have yet to hear him say or read him write anything that contradicts his profession.”
I have yet to hear the gospel and the place it has in salvation. He definitely challenges people to help people, but I have sincerely looked for one time where he makes salvation – just one time – and I have come up empty, and based on the need to explain why there isn’t any, apparently so has everyone else.
He seems to be a bright and humble man.
AMEN on this!
You would think a believer who blogs and writes would at some time make a clear Gospel defining statement…
On the other hand, the lack thereof does not prove his denial of the same.
Any challenge cuts both ways… show me his statement of faith says one, shoe me his denial of it says the other.
I believe the parable in question seems to be a proof of works salvation, unless Rollins interprets it differently.
He has openly called me a goat.
…also – topic and audience are relevant (though I do not know if this applies to Rollins, since, as I said, I am pretty much ignorant regarding him)…we have seen this repeatedly with guys like Bell. He writes a book to Christians and gets racked over the coals for not presenting the Gospel.
I wonder, if he were still writing, if guys like Larry Burket would be addressed in a similar manner.
I hardly think this parable, on its own, is enough to question his soteriology and call for a clarification.
Even though I thought it a bit rough, it is true that the structure of a parable is to communicate one big over-arching point… it’s not to be dissected for individual meaning and nuances.
If that were the case e would have constructed an allegory.
I do not believe a misplaced eschatology warrants a correction that leads all the way to goats vs. sheep. That is self righteousness, if indeed it implies that you are the sheep.
According to Jesus, if I don’t feed the hungry, if I don’t give water to the thirsty, if I don’t invite in the stranger, if I don’t clothe the naked, if I don’t look after the sick and if I don’t visit those in prison, I am a goat.
Matthew 25:41-45
If…
According to Corey, who claims to have some sort of relationship with Peter, he is not exempting himself from the goat herd.
I just think it’s a big leap to think that Rollins is somehow intending to get the point across that he is including himself in the “sheep” group and others in the “goats” group. I don’t see where he makes that distinction. From what I’ve read and heard of him, he seems to be a pretty self-deprecating guy, so it would seem a bit unlike him to write something with the intent of saying “I’m right and you’re wrong”.
73 – I would not say I have a relationship with Peter. I spent 4-5 hours with him when he was in town for a small conference. And I’m hypothesizing that he wouldn’t imply that he was a sheep based on the humility he demonstrates when talking about his own failings.
fair enough…thanks for the clarification
You’ve got to love these “end of the world” predictors. While scanning the radio dial, I recently stumbled across the guy from Oakland. Campy (I forgot his first name) and his Family Radio Network.
He’s calling for the end of the world to take place on May 20th 2011.
And as luck would have it, I was at an area County Fair, and the station had a booth set up. I had a rather bizarre conversation with a spokesman from the station. What planet do these guys come from?
He was very adamant about the May 20th date, even though Campy predicated the end would come back in 1994. Oops, I guess that was a slight miscalculation.
I’m guilty of goofing on him, but I couldn’t resist. I wanted his advice. If the world was coming to an end in just a year and a half, should I put off making any large purchases? I told him I wanted to buy a new car, but it didn’t appear to make much sense if I was only going to get a year or two’s enjoyment out of it. And I asked him if, all things considered, it made more sense to make monthly payments as opposed to paying cash upfront for the full value of the car.
I was disappointed in his advice. He told me his car is 11 years old. He suggested I take care of the car I’ve got. I think I can probably squeeze two more years out of it.
But then…watch out! If there’s a May 21st 2011, I’m buying that Mustang convertible I’ve had my sights on for a while. I just hope Campy isn’t off by a day or two. I’d like to get at least a full summer of fun with the top down.
By the time fall and winter comes around, I won’t really care.
I thought it was December 21, 2012, myself
Obviously, the producers of the movie forgot to touch base with Harold Camping before they went ahead with their movie. I just checked Harold’s website. May 21st is the date, not the 20th. I was hoping God would make it happen after Memorial Day and the Indy 500. He must not be an open wheel racing fan. I won’t renew my seat license if that’s the case.
As you said – it is Camping, Harold Camping… and he is a complete wacko. I do not use that term very often against those profession Christ – but he’s of the Fred Phelps caliber.
He has set dates a number of times. He also says the church age has ended and people are no longer being saved through any organized church – ANY church.
If you listen to his program at any length he is a master of allegorizing (and twisting).
It’s the kind thing that is both amazing and maddening at the same time.
Being a HAM radio operator and the HF bands being within the shortwave bands I often tune into the shortwave wacko, pirate stations, Camping is mild compared to some I hear on shortwave.
If anyone has access to any shortwave equipment you should take a spin around the dial….it can be entertaining to say the least. It’ll give one a whole new perspective on the tin foil hats!
The Rapture?
Enough said
Then is there any reason you would plead with a friend, family member, who is a practicing homosexual whom you consider saved to turn from that particular sin, especially if person in question is loving, a good citizen, seems completely happy, etc, etc?
#83 – And this is where the ministry of the Holy Spirit sometimes clashes with the ministry of man. I believe it is disobedience to the obvious command of Scripture to save up piles of money for your own future use. I may teach that, but I do not go around pleading with people to empty their accounts and give it to missions.
BTW – There are millions of loving, happy, and good citizens who are professing believers who go prayerless, judge others, speed, covet, love America, never witness, and yet are deacons in the church, to say nothing of the evangelical teeming masses.
I do condone gay sexual behavior, but Scripture does not say that prevents a person from being saved. The verse in Corinthians Paul says those sinners are washed, but he doesn’t say they never commit those sins. The language that John uses about hatred is far mor serious and straightforward and yet there is a significant amount of that alive and well in the church.
Who is going to heaven:
1. A practicing gay person who believe that Jesus is the only Saviour and has many areas of his life changed, but he is decieved about homosexual behavior.
or
2. A heterosexual believer who has a lot of saved up money, enjoys the entrapments of western hedonism, and hates the gay community.
There are SIGNIFICANTLY more verses and warnings about hatred than there are about homosexual behavior.
So as it applies to grace and love toward professing believers who are practicing homosexuals – take a walk on the wild side!! (Lou Reed)
Ravi Zacharius has taught the same thing that I believe. (I know, he’s apostate.)
#84 I do not condone (it should read)
I agree with Rick on this one. I don’t really think our pleading with anyone really ever convinces them that a particular behavior is wrong. I actually think in many cases it has the opposite of the intended effect and causes them to dig their heels in and get defensive.
Certainly if I had a friend who I perceived was struggling in a certain area, I hope I would be able to walk beside him in a non-judgmental way. At some point it seems we have to determine to love people even if they don’t do what we think they should do. In many cases, it seems we have to really step back and let the Holy Spirit work.
I agree with Phil’s agreement.
I too would hope I would be able to walk beside anyone in a non-judgmental way… assuming they knew of my disapproval. That’s the balance I think should be maintained in (most) any situation.