I’m reading some really good books right now. I think I like them because they irritate me and I get all worked up when I read them. One, especially, is driving me nuts. It’s a book by Steven Furtick called Sun Stand Still and it is an especially unpleasant read–for the most part.
Another book, Whole Life Transformation, by Keith Meyer comes off at times as way too autobiographical and winy, but I’m starting to open up to it a bit more the deeper I get into it.
As I was reading, I came across a rather lengthy quote that I thought you (the readers) might appreciate. The quote is from a man I have never heard of who lived a really, really long time ago. I have no context other than what Meyer gives, so the quote is sort of threadbare as far as it goes.
One of the most persistent mistakes of Christian men has been to postpone social regeneration to a future era to be inaugurated by the return of Christ…It is true that any regeneration of society can come only through the act of God and the presence of Christ; but God is now acting, and Christ is now here. To assert that means not less faith, but more. It is true that any regeneration of society is dogged by perpetual relapses and doomed forever to fall short of its aim. But the same is true of our personal efforts to live a Christ-like life; it is true, also of every local church, and of the history of the church at large. Whatever argument would demand the postponement of social regeneration to a future era will equally demand the postponement of personal holiness to a future life. (Meyer’s emphasis; quote from Walter Rauschenbusch, Christianity and the Social Crisis in the 21st Century, ed Paul B Raushenbush, p 283. Meyer quotes him on page 50 of Whole Life Transformation.)
Well, I have to be honest with you when I say: that sounds right to me. What do you think? Is there a correlation between personal holiness and social regeneration? Do you think Rauschenbusch was on to something when he wrote that more than a century ago?
169 Comments(+Add)
Jerry, Jerry. How many times have I defended you from Rick for being “autobiographical and winy”
I believe the New Atestament gives prophetic glimpses into earthly society that continues to slide downward in the end. I believe we can affect our neighbors, but society will always be a mixed bag.
American society has had an overwhelming percentage of professing Christians and yet is a violent, fetus killing, and hedonist society. To me, redemption is one person at a time. In fact, let us start to see an observable regeneration in the church then we can turn to the “society”.
I think where “Christian Social Reconstruction” falls short is that it attempts, too often, to depend on secular legislation efforts and the forced redistribution of wealth instead of regenerated lives to effect change. We are primarily tasked with making disciples, not reforming earthly governments. A regenerated people will automatically create a more God-like society. I think that is where we are to concentrate our efforts.
However, you all know I am into the concept of balance and as Paul states “laws are made for the lawless” and God has instituted government of which we are all a part. I definately think that any society has the right (and obligation) to enact laws that protect the weak, punish wrong-doing and foster justice. I just think the Church’s main charter is to create disciples and when a critical mass of Christ-followers is reached the society in which they live will automtically be transformed.
As Christians in this present age we are to live Godly lives and promote justice and charity within the communities in which we live. This is logically effected in both our personal actions as citizens and in the legislation we would promote and support for society as a whole.
So, on the one hand we know we only trurly have a righteous govenment when we are rule by the Righteous One (a future event). But we are to live Godly lives and promote Godly principles here in the present which can mitigate much unnecessary heartache and sorrow in the here and now.
America, like Rome before her, will fall. The rich have always been the rich. America was unique in that it had such a large and prosperous middle class. However, we have reached a tipping point where those on the government dole can out vote the producers of that dole and continue to increase their handouts.
Like Rome we are now a people of bread and circuses. Any society that knows more about Lindsey Lohan than current political events is probably past saving.
Enjoy the twilight boys. Night is fast approaching.
Ah, disregard my previous post. All is well, America is great and will never fall. An internet connection in every home and free porn for all!
Rick, to be fair, I think that is a large part of the emergent movement in getting our actions aligned with our theology.
i was basically weaned on the theology that the world was a sinking ship and we were to rescue (get saved) as many as we could before it finally goes under… to paraphrase moody.
this leaves little room or time for god restoring things or the church to transform culture. in fact, this kind of stuff was seen as “polishing the brass on a sinking ship.” it was what liberals did, or we did if we must to get them to hear the gospel.
i am looking for a substantive book that gives the biblical/theological basis for the new optimism.
fall to whom? if you want to compare america to rome… including her fall… you need to explain to whome we will fall. the roman empire basically fell to the barbarian tribes of the north after it was weakened form within.
i do not foresee america falling – like rome.
i see america becoming mediocre and irrelevant (yet continuing to exist) – like france.
America has already fallen, and in fact, was created fallen. All nations are made up of individuals and have no claim to divine favor. Rome fallen? Rome was a violent totalitarian empire that operated in a fallen state.
for the most part i disagree. it is a change in theology.
the predominant belief throughout the 20th century was as i described in #7.
if your theology tells you that societal transformation is in vain and a waste of time, if what we are to be about is only saving souls – then not doing anything about societal ills IS being consistent with your theology.
the emergents (though i do not like using this term in this context as it is oft misleading) are not so much aligning actions with theology, as they are realigning theology and then acting on it.
this is not what we are talking about… no one said anything of divine favor. john claimed that america would fall… like rome. it has not, and i do not think it will. not in the sense that rome did.
#11 – I claim it began fallen. What is your definition of “fall”? Economically? Militarily? Does 50% divorce rate, incredible violence, million + abortions, decadence galore – does that equate a “fall”?
I read Rauschenbusch’s book, Christianity and the Social Crisis last year, and I have to say, it was hard ti find a lot to disagree with. There are some parts where I think he cedes too much to “higher criticism” in the way he talks about the Old Testament in particular. But his basic premise is pretty good. Raushenbusch’s book is dealing with a particular historical time for the most part, and he was attempting to get the church to stand up to many of the exploitative practices of business and governments towards the working poor.
A good book about the goodness of creation and the biblical view of creation is God and World in the Old Testament by Terence E. Fretheim. He does a good job showing how the earth and the created order are not simply a stage created for human being to act upon, but rather, creation and humanity are intimately related, and when people sin, it ends up affecting not just us, but everything around us.
John,
Yeah. I wrote that with tongue in cheek, firmly.
jerry
Brilliant!!
re 12: if you are using “fallen” in the genesis 3 sense – then i agree. is suspect we all would.
however, john was using it in a decidedly different manner when he compared it to the roman empire. he said she would fall like rome – which implies ceases to exist.
Well, I’ll say this much. I haven’t read R’s book, but I think I will. Most of the stuff from his time frame is usually all about getting people saved and revivals and this and that. And that’s fine, as far as it goes.
But I’m sort of like Neil (his comment about Next Christians in the other thread). I want substance. And I know I will get in trouble for this, but I find that substance in the work of NT Wright.
I haven’t found it yet from any author in my own tradition (CoC) and I haven’t found the balance in the wider evangelical church either. What I’m looking for (and one reason why I’m not a member of a specific church right now) is substantive theology and active social interaction. I just cannot find that in either of the two places I attend: it’s either one or the other. (In one of the churches I attend, we have been debating for about 2 months what to name our new Sunday School class.)
jerry
would you offer this a an answer to my quest (cf. 10)?
in this sense i agree we have always been fallen. america is no worse today than before – we’re just more efficient.
Continuing on….NT Wright’s work is, in my judgment, the best balance of those two worlds: substantive theology and radical call to put faith into practice. And he is the reason why I am most leaning towards leaving the CoC permanently and becoming and Anglican.
I haven’t seen so much balance in any author I have read (excepting perhaps Eugene Peterson, but for all my love of Peterson, even he tends to dwell a bit in the theological side and his application sometimes falls a bit short). Not so with Wright who consistently calls us to put feet to our faith and challenges his readers to be aware that theology is meaningless if it is not changing our lives at deep and fundamental levels.
jerry
re 10, 11, 17;
there are a lot of books out now talking about god restoring creation and how we can be agents of his restoration. in the books i have read so far – with the exception of one by n. t. wright – this theological position is assumed, but never fully developed or supported.
contrary to what john said in #6, i think this a change in theological perspective.
i like the change, but before i embrace and argue for it – i’d like better biblical documentation.
Yeah, that was my intent.
I also think that Wright does a good job, but I was assuming you already knew that…
During the cold war if you took the Soviet military away it would be like India. Today, aside from religious intolerance, America is like China.
The cool thing about the Fretheim book I mentioned is that he bases his thesis on the idea that God is relational, and everything He does is based on the relationality. That includes the act of creation, and His decision to include humanity in the stewardship of creation. He actually sees stewardship as almost a type of co-creation, but it’s not that humans have the ability to create from nothing. But we have been endowed with gifts to glorify God through creating things of beauty, and by doing this we are engaging in a relational way with the Creator. I found it very interesting and challenging.
#24 – I agree with your comment. All of that comes through redemption. In fact, redemption had to be God’s reason for creation.
Rome had an empire. It fell.
England had an empire. It fell.
Russia had an empire. It fell.
America has an empire. It will fall.
It’s the natural order of things.
Liked your analogy of France though!
things that make go – “Hmmmmm”
Rome, did not cease to exist BTW. Europe and America are direct decendants of Rome.
There is only one lasting kingdom and it dwells inside almost every country.
that’s like saying john lennon did not cease to exist because sean is still alive.
there is now no roman empire, therefore its existence ceased at some point.
now, if you original point was not so much existence as world domination – then i agree, america is/will fall.
The scripture is pretty clear; The kingdom of God is yet to come, but it is here. It is manifested in each individual Christian.
I believe that if the statistic that places 87% of people in this country as Christian that this country and its laws and mores would be a whole lot different. We would not have pornography, rated R movies, we would have blasphemy laws. We would not have abortion. We would not need welfare or social security. We would not have a credit issue or foreclosures on homes.
But since there is not, and since only 2% of believers actually verbally share their faith, we still have a multitude of false conversions (where we get this claim of 87%) and false Christians who live inconsistently and as a result, we see no societal impact. In fact, with the emergents like Bell and Seeker sensitives like Schuller and Warren, it is society affecting change in ‘christianity’ than Christianity affecting change in culture.
those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.
a friend was lamenting the changes in america the other day, he offered the fact that, in his town, the police used to ticket people from mowing their yards on sundays and now they do not. i contend it is not a good thing when the state (at any level) enforces theological positions.
i suppose having the state enforce theology is fine – as long as it is YOUR theology…
#32
We would not need blasphemy laws if 87% of the people were Christians. Up until about 45 years ago, we had them in the movies. They are still on the books in many counties in the USA. If 87% of the people were Christian, for real, there would be no acceptance of Blasphemy. It would not be tolerated. People would take it as seriously as God does, who ‘will not hold him blameless who takes His name in vain’.
But of course, many emergents and other christians in name only accept it and even justify it in movies, etc. all in the name of entertainment and free speech.
#11 America will fall. Count on it. Abortion on demand, legalized Homosexuals in the military, pornography, child molestation/pedophelia….guaranteed we will go the way of Rome, Greece, Babylon.
The wrath of God is already being poured out. It will get worse.
vs.
re #34 – well, greece still exists, so you may want to omit that example.
are you saying that homosexuals in the military and abortion on demand are worse than slavery and genocide?
what data do you have that pedophilia is more prevalent today than previous?
on what are you basing this?
pboy, who’s interpretation of the bible should the state enforce? maybe we should create the FBC – the federal blaspheme commission. like the fcc they would monitor all sermons, television shows, movies, newspapers, blogs, talk-shows, books, street preachers, and christmas cards for blaspheme…
Homosexuals in the military is a sign? Can an atheist kill people for America? Adulterers? Muslims? Homosexuals, the consistent whipping boys.
I don’t want the state having any part of me.
#35 The 2% is from Bill Bright. Barna is the same dude who claims 87% in America are Christians. These same people may think serving a thanksgiving dinner with a homeless person is sharing Christ. Even if that is done in the basement of a methodist church, it is just serving food not sharing Christ. To a Catholic (which Barna, not the Bible considers christian) sharing Christ is putting a statue on your front lawn. It can be of Mary, by the way- same import)
#36 Look at the world around you, Neil. The popularity of Joel Osteen, Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, Rick Warren is proof that the wrath of God is being poured out. The people are getting their ears tickled and the Gospel is being lost. Evidence of the wrath of God. Romans 1:18-32 is replete with examples of the prominence of sins that will be evidences of the wrath of God- like upswings in homosexuality, specifically lesbianism, looking at an increase in murder (abortion, etc- which by the way is a woman not acting naturally towards her baby) hatred of parents, disobedience…etc.
Just look around Neil. Start with the daily paper. Compare this with just 45 years ago. Evidence of the wrath of God has increased with the wickedness of man in my lifetime.
#37 And then we have Neil, defending Blasphemy. You know very well what it is, and what it is not.
I regularly use the name Mohammad as a curse word.
#38 Evidence, not a sign.
Look in history about what has happened to every country who has made homosexuals in the military legally recognized and encouraged.
I rest my case.
This conversation reminds me of this post on Tony Jones’ blog from earlier this year.
It’s also interesting to hear Protestants lament the lack of blasphemy laws. The Catholic church charged Luther with blasphemy. Should the church back had the right to enforce this charge in some way? Why any Christian would want to give the state to enforce such things is a mystery to me.
the other day phil made a comment against legalism and you accused him of saying holiness was a burden.
i asked you a simple question about who on the federal levelshould decide what constitutes blaspheme and you say i am defending it.
in your all too typical style… you take something someone says and twist it beyond all recognition – while not answering the question.
re 39a: once again you speak a false accusation:
further, your 2% quote of bright is also flawed – he did not find only 2% verbally share their faith, he found 2% had recently led someone to the lord. there is a difference.
LOL
(i was gonna add a disclaimer that saying this does not mean i endorse these guys…. then i thought – is it possible to try and preemptively address all the ways pboy can twist what i say?)
Which the catholics would say is attending mass and going to confession.
If Barna was correct, we would live in a much different society.
#31 I just looked back. It should read “we should not have blasphemy laws” or even better “we would not need blasphemy laws”
Later I made the point that there are blasphemy laws still in effect in this country in many municipalities/counties. They used to be in the movies. If 87% of the population were Christian, they would not see Rated R movies or movies with blasphemy. With only a % of the remaining 13% seeing these movies, Hollywood would not make them anymore. Simple economics.
just what are you suggesting is god’s wrath against america?
are you suggesting that a softening stance on homosexuality is worse than slavery? is abortion on demand worse than genocide?
i call for specific evidence that a) god even judges nations in this dispensation, b) that the sins of the generation are worse than those of the previous, and c) that his judgment is being poured out against america now.
let’s try this again…
I suppose God was sleeping during the slavery, and that the ensuing civil war, fought over states rights, was not a form of judgment on this country?
I claim God does judge nations and individuals, both in this life and in the next. Of course, if you believe Greg Boyd, God’s mind is always changing based upon our actions and He does not know what will happen tomorrow.
abortion on demand is genocide, particulalrly to the minorities in this country.
homosexuality and slavery are both equally bad; slavery was judged, harshly by God IMHO, and now, our nation has opened itself up to further wrath.
#48
lets try this again
Which the catholics would say is attending mass and going to confession.
or going to confession and attending mass.
if anyone else said this, i would have assumed it was a mistake – but i just assumed you were serious about blaspheme laws. glad to hear it was a typo. would you recant you accusation that i defend blaspheme?
#51 Sure I recant. Don’t put me on the rack.
wait…what?
so if a catholic acknowledges his/her sin, invites jesus to save them from the consequences of that sin, ask god for forgiveness – but attends mass it is null & void?
wow – simply wow! apparently god gave YOU the keys to heaven.
thank you… you do see the difference between defending blaspheme and not wanting it federalized – right?
speculation at best.
genocide then… genocide now… so the heart of man has not changed, society was just as bad then as now.
i have never read boyd, so i am uninfluenced by him. regardless… this diversionary ad hominem will not work.
i call for specific biblical evidence that a) god even judges nations in this age as he did the old, b) that the sins of the generation are worse than those of the previous, and c) examples of his judgment being poured out against america now.
Obviously, PB hasn’t read him either, so you shouldn’t feel bad…
I love watching the evolution of a thread. It started out with a quote written by a guy who lived in the late 1800’s and the early 1900’s and went from there to a conversation about Greg Boyd.
I wonder if John C has a comment about anything in the OP?
i think he is arguing against the quote in the op… though i am not sure what relevance boyd has to the discussion.
God isn’t pouring out His wrath upon anyone in this age of Jesus. God doesn’t deal with “nations/ethics” as a whole, He is interested in the salvation of everyone.
How is God going to punish nations? By eternal retribution on individuals? See, God deals with individuals since nations are just the collective of the afore mentioned individuals.
I would submit that abortion, peversion, violence, and deception within the church is not evidence of God’s wrath but of God’s longsuffering. The day of reckoning has not yet come.
Should read “nations/races”
It’s interesting PB brought up Greg Boyd. Boyd put an article up last week about the slaughter of the firstborn in Bethlehem that I thought was very good. If we try to assign different things happening because of the “hidden” will of God, or because of judgment, we are left viewing God with constant fear and suspicion. We can never really be sure what His intentions are towards us. One minute He may be happy, and the other He may be ticked off. I think a lot of Christians still view God as capricious like this. Rather than believing that God has good for us, we simply think that unless we act a certain way, the other shoe will drop at some point.
Boyd’s point is that because Christ has come, we know once and for all what God is like. He is like Christ. Christ is the final answer of God’s will toward the world. We need not fear judgment or wrath from a capricious God because we just remind ourselves of what Christ did.
From the article:
I think this relates to the original post in this sense. Many Christians are content waiting for God to send judgment to the earth. What is harder for them to see and imagine is the idea that perhaps God wants to use them to bring healing to the world.
Assigning divine motive to earthly events is usually the height of self righteousness since it assumes a divine insight given to that individual, as well as a sense of satisfaction with God’s judgment based upon the unspoken feeling that the person is on God’s side. (or God is on that person’s side.)
Having the correct systematic theology does not translate into God’s favor, and in fact, it presents an enormous platform for self righteousness which undermines the entire reason for God’s redemptive truth.
I have, in 35 years of being a believer, rarely met a preacher who can present the truth about God’s judgment without a hint of self righteousness, contentment, or even drawing some satisfaction with his “God’s judgment” orthodoxy.
rick,
we’ve heard this kind of thing so many times from so many sources – 9/11 was a judgment on america, katrina was a judgment on new orleans, etc, etc, etc…
what if we expanded the theology a bit and said god judges churches as well? so if something bad happens to a church it too is under god’s judgment.
of course the speculation is endless and the satisfaction can be alluring.
Every saint answers to God for themselves, with the exceptions being a husband for his family and a pastor for his local fellowship etc.. Does God judge states? Counties? Continents? The Scriptures are clear: We will all give an account personally, but at this moment the door to the gospel ark remains open to whosoever will.
In Bible school one of my professors suggested that a hurricane had destroyed a bar in Miami because God got tired of their sin. I asked that professor why God had also destroyed several churches. The professor had to admit he was just speculating.
God knows where pedophiles are this very moment abusing and even torturing children, and yet He does nothing (at this time). But He is “pouring out His wrath” because of liberal preachers?
No, God’s wrath will come but it has not yet. When it does EVERYONE will recognize it as such.
i saw a map that someone created of florida. they overlapped the paths of hurricanes and showed how certain counties were hit while others spared. then they showed how each county voted in a recent election (bush v. gore)… and sure enough – all the counties that voted one way got nailed, while all the counties that voted the other way were spared.
care to guess which was which?
#67 – That is tin foil hat theology!
People treat God’s judgment like a game of “Risk”. I wonder why China is prospering?
rick, i agree… what i found interesting about the map was it “proved” god’s judgment based on how counties voted. and all the counties judged, all the counties hit by hurricanes (multiple hurricanes mind you) – voted for bush!
that is what i found funny about it.
china – a commie state
the middle east – deniers of jesus and persecutors of israel
germany – hello!
all flourish. it really makes the whole judging nations things rather weak – as well as basing foreign policy on gen 12.
#70 – Why do I have to be judged when I did not vote?
When is Hugh Hefner going to be judged? He’s going to marry another gourgeous model and he’s 84 years old.
All these years of drugs and sex and he’s been able to avoid God’s judgment. Stupid.
association
Don’t take this the wrong way, but three wives? He’s already been judged.
#75 –
I wonder why China is prospering? china – a commie state the middle east – deniers of jesus and persecutors of israel germany – hello! all flourish. it really makes the whole judging nations things rather weak – as well as basing foreign policy on gen 12.
God’s wrath is (1) at once immediate:
And (2) a future event:
The Holy Sprit is always grieved at sin and the Father is always angry at sin (in righteous indignation). In the present age of Grace it appears evident to me that God’s immediate wrath is primarily passive in that He normally let’s us suffer the consequences of our sin rather than exhibit overt displays of wrathful events. (I’m with Rick: it is foolish to try to determine which, if any, natural disasters, are from the direct intervention of God and which are not). And yet, as these scriptures show, God is keeping an account and at some future date He will pour out His wrath on the unrepentant (i.e., on The Day of Wrath) which will, by all Biblical accounts, be shockingly brutal (e.g., the fierce winepress of His wrath, Cup of Wrath, etc.).
I am thankful we, as Christians, are not destined for the Day of Wrath, although we do, even as Christians, experience the consequences of our sin like all the rest of humanity.
I have a hard time squaring the idea of God still holding back some of His wrath with what Paul says in Romans 5, especially verses 12-21. It seems so clear that Paul in this passage, and others, tries to convey the idea that the cross was completely adequate to deal with everything that needed dealt with.
That doesn’t mean there aren’t consequences for sin, and that there aren’t people who will remain separated from God for eternity. It doesn’t even mean that to some people, what they experience may seem like wrath. I like the idea talked about by some Orthodox writers that talks about the fire of God’s love. The burning passion the Father has for people can either be experienced as a redeeming fire or a consuming one that people will want to run from.
Phil,
How do you validate that world view with Romans 2:5, for one, and other Pauline passages which speaks of a future day for God’s personal wrath. I find that very odd. So Paul spoke of a future wrath in one verse, but really didn’t mean it?
Not to mention the numerous passages in Revelation?
True, but what was accomplished at the cross must be accepted by faith in order to be appropriated, else, one will die in their sins and face the wrath of God. Only believers are “rescued from the wrath to come”.
Then again, other articles from Orthodox writers whom you have linked to promote a blatant Christian universalism world view, so that pretty much is indicative of how they would “explain away” a day of future wrath.
the original point proposed by pboy and backed up by questionable data use) was that america – as a nation – is being wrathed upon already because DADT was repealed… among other things.
Lol, “being wrathed upon” – I like that…
Reminds me of this:
The verses about future wrath are like verses about sign gifts . . . they are no longer applicable since the canon was completed.
John,
What I disagree with more with than the idea than the concept of future wrath is the idea of wrath being poured out against people. God’s wrath isn’t like a personal vendetta against sinners. It’s a judgment against sin. In Romans 8:3, Paul says God “condemned sin in the flesh” when referring to what happened at the cross. He doesn’t say He condemned Christ himself.
So God’s wrath is a bit like radiation treatment or chemotherapy towards sin. If people end up holding onto their sin and refuse to let it go, they may face the effects of the wrath meant to eradicate sin. I believe the treatment, to stick with the metaphor, began at the cross – I suppose you could say it ended there as well. We are simply waiting to see the full effect of it.
nathanael – how so?
Neil, a vain attempt at humor. Sorry.
i’d like to argue for a middle way. i think it is apparent in scripture that god will, at some time in the future, pour out wrath.
on the other hand, i see no evidence that he is currently manipulating economies, the weather, or armies based on a nations allegiance to his word.
OK – sorry i missed it.
#86 – Also my position.
#83 – So where is personal responsibility and ultimately accountability? As I see it we have one of two choices, to stand in Christ’s mertis or stand in our own.
And wheter or not the wrath is directed at sin or the sinner the result is the same as the sinner is the vessel for sin and gets “wrath-a-zized” along with the sin.
Further, God’s Day of Wrath is poured out on the (temporal) flesh of men, not to mention a further spiritual (eternal) punishment after that.
Sorry, but I’m just not tracking with your thought process here.
Nathanael,
Had me there for a minute bud.
My thought process is this. We say the Father loves everyone unconditionally, but don’t you see that adding a “but, if you don’t repent, He’ll damn you to Hell” is adding a condition? I simply don’t believe God damns anyone to Hell – the damn themselves.
I don’t believe God is storing up any further wrath for sinners – it’s all been dealt with. That is why He is able to reconcile with sinners. I actually think that believing that God will at sometime in the future stop acting in a way towards humanity that it full of grace and love causes all sorts of problems for Christians now. If I believe God isn’t completely satisfied with Christ’s sacrifice for sin right now, then there’s no guarantee of my standing with Him in the future.
God will in the future set the world to rights, and all the evil that we see in the world at the moment will be dealt with. If it weren’t dealt with once and for all, that wouldn’t be loving. So people are either caught up in this movement or they are working against it. Those working against it will eventually fade into the nothingness that they worship.
Basically, I see love and wrath as two sides of the same coin. God is consistent in His action towards us – it’s our response to this love that determines how we will experience it.
Mankind is already condemened through Adam. The gospel is the only good news. Like gravity pulling an infant to its death over a cliff, the principle is already set.
The fall is pervasive and complete.
But, thankfully, Christ’s work is more pervasive and more complete!
“But, thankfully, Christ’s work is more pervasive and more complete!”
Through faith alone!
Phil, that is a denial of many scriptures. You have isolated ONE of God’s attributes — Love — and ignored all His others. There is a perfectly synthesis of love, hate, mercy, wrath, grace and judgement.
Yes, of all God’s attribtes, love is the greatest and because of God’s love He made the way through Jesus Christ. But that way must be appropriated through faith, else it is not applied. Christ is the Passover Lamb. The angel of death is coming. The blood is available to all, but not all apply it.
Phil, Phil, so now we must add annilhilationism to “The List”?
I see Phil as suggesting God is passive and not active. But it really does not matter – all who die in Christ inherit eternal life, but all who die in their sins inherit eternal death.
Some do use some unfortunate language (God will damn you to hell, etc.) which may misrepresent God’s heart, but we all misrepresent God in some ways. I think suggesting that God does not desire to save everyone is a great heresy, even worse than some forms of universalism.
Jerry, you said in the op:
Can you share a little more as to why it’s such a frustrating read? Thanks!
Paul,
I will be writing a review in a week or so. Suffice it to say, that it just gets kind of old reading about how some people never seem to struggle with failure. That sounds sort of like sour grapes, but I assure you it is a little more complex than that.
jerry
People who never fail rarely learn.
Failure is not an option; its a requirement.
Jerry, I will look forward to that review.
The church is filled with divorce, promiscuity, hedonism, complaining, unforgiveness, prayerlessness, lack of witnessing, judgmentalism, debt, and a redundant lifestyle that individually and collectively mirrors the culture around us. We love our books, our music, our favorite preachers, anything “new”, and mountains of discussions. Even when faced with the command to be crucified and die to self, we are still alive and kicking and most unconcerned with the entire scenario. I would say that when juxtaposed against the clear teachings of the New Testament, the western church is little more than a religious scandal.
So before we get all excited about experiencing any “social regeneration” we must become concerned with our lack of exhibition concerning redemption itself.
If being born again carries with it no more evidence than that which is observable in the western church than it is can rightly be maligned as a “pie in the sky” religion.
But we all love our pie.
Perhaps you’re looking at the correlation between lack of personal righteousness and the ability to affect social change from the wrong direction. For a long time now, evangelicals have looked at salvation as a purely personal thing – as something that’s just between you and God. It really doesn’t require any other people in the picture. Perhaps this sort of individualistic thinking actually breeds the problems you list in your first paragraph. After all, if salvation is only about my personal relationship with God, it takes away a lot of the ingrained accountability a community offers in dealing with these issues.
I guess what I’m saying is that for as long as I can remember, I’ve heard preachers say that if we got our own personal lives on track, then God could send revival to the country or to the world. In my experience, though, this is kind of backwards. God chooses to use us in our imperfection, while we are still imperfect, to reach the world. I simply think that continuing to preach a personal pietism as the aim of Christianity will continue to breed the sort of apathy we see. It’s like the old saying – expecting to see different results while continuing to do the same thing is the definition of insanity. We don’t need a more extreme form of personalized, inward-focused religion – we need a holistic Christianity that encourages us be integrated in the Church body and work out our salvation through love for Christ and others.
Which is, finally, to get at the substance of the quote in the OP. And is, to be sure, much of the point of contention I have with some books. I don’t think God needs our perfection or our perfect prayers (or the right prayers) in order to use us and accomplish his purposes.
Much good work is done in the name of Jesus despite the less than perfect person doing the doing.
No one claimed God does not use imperfect and compromised people. My contention has always been that we settle for that and project that in order to avoid addressing some disturbing issues.
If the comparative good is our target – bullseye.
Re 104 – it is amazing how many of those things were present in OT Israel, in NT churches, and continue today. It’s as if the churches today are made up of people just like millenia gone by.
Yet she was and is the beloved bride, the body of christ, the community against which even the gates of hell cannot and will not prevail.
Re 107 – addressing some disturbing issues is one thing… writing off the whole western expression of christianity as a compromising failure is something quite different.
my study of church history and my study of current non-wesern churches causes me to reject this
As opposed to what? Could you give a concrete example from your own life how you have done this differently or is there no hope? Are we just doomed to sit around and point out the errors?
“Could you give a concrete example from your own life how you have done this differently or is there no hope?”
I refuse to set up myself as an example of what to do or what not to do. The voice of prophecy often speaks truth that indicts that very mouthpiece. But the study of church history is irrelevant, as is the examples of unfaithfulness and compromise in the OT and the NT.
Are we doomed to sit around and point out the errors? Those that are “pointing out the errors” are a diminishing breed. Those that are blind to them are legion.
Failure is an Option.
This is a good read, especially that ending.
The study of church history, non-western churches, and ot and nt failutes is absolutely and fundamentally relevant in my rejection of your thesis and the paradigm through which you operate.
countless times you have called those who disagree with you blind, and yet, ironically in the same comment you say the stories of those who lived the faith before us are irrelevant.
The New Testament Scriptures are the only litmus test for the church. Even if all other historical expressions of Christianity were compromised, that should not provide us with some comparative comfort. I have found some evidence of more accurate expressions of following Christ in years gone by, but that still is not our goal.
We are not those who compare ourselves with ourselves.
I understand I am in the distinct minority. I also understand that what I sincerely believe will target me for ridicule, suggestions of self righteousness, negativity, and my own life as proof that my observations are not true.
I am willing to endure those slings and arrows since they are not altogether false and not altogether true.
do not equate arguments to the contrary as ridicule.
the issue is not comparative comfort, the issue is your constant rejection of the western church as some kind of failure.
#117 – Not mine, but God’s.
Are there any churches that are addressed in Revelation 2 and 3? If so, which ones?
so now you are saying god says the western church is a failure?
i do not understand the rev 2 and 3 question.
Does God describe prophetically any modern churches in Rev. 2 and 3?
Yes, the western church is a harlot.
revelation 2 and 3 is not prophetic in some outline of church history. it is a series of letters to churches and is indicative of, and instructional to, churches of all times and of all places.
as for name calling.. sticks and stones… stick and stones…
“and is indicative of, and instructional to, churches of all times and of all places.”
Ok, so which ones today are indicative of those described in revelation? Any?
The name harlot was coined by God.
i’m not sure i understand the follow-up question – sorry.
but applied/assigned by you. he also coined names such as “bride” and “body.”
Neil – Do you consider any churches or church groups as being a prophetic alignment of any of the churches in rev. 2 or 3? In other words, are there any churches today, or type of churches, that are significantly backslidden and spiritually blind.
But if I used the words bride or body you would have no objection even though it would still be me assigning them. Hmm…
You are the western church.
Your hyperbole makes me laugh.
#129 – And that is very sad.
certainly there are.
Which part?
hmmm? not sure your point or how you know this to be true. context is everyting.
god calls the church his bride and the body of christ, is harlot ever used by god to describe the church?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?
Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.
Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.”
Among others.
“Which part?”
That you find my observations humorous. But I take no offense.
james was written to specific believers, either individuals or maybe a whole collection of them – not the church as a whole.
is there any place god uses such terms against the church?
Not your observations, just your hyperbole. Big difference. And you shouldn’t take offense. Your entire line of castigating the church is wrong and not your job–regardless of how prophetic you believe yourself to be.
You would condemn the entire Bride, Body, for no reason other than your own limited experiences. That is sad.
I don’t even think you know what you are saying, let alone that you believe it yourself.
# 133
Not the true church, but He does describe some in Israel- those who are not true Israel- as a Harlot.
I suspect those who worship finances, career, sports, certain celebrity pastors (Bell, Warren, et.al), would be called Harlots in this day and very appropriately. I would argue most of the modern western church are harlots rather than the true bride.
The thing is, Rick, only God is in a place to properly judge the Church, as a whole or as individuals. For us to a go around accusing certain parts of the Church of being a harlot seems quite ridiculous. Of course, the Church is not as faithful as it should be – that would be true through the ages. It was true with Israel, yet God didn’t abandon her.
I understand people with a more prophetic calling often see things in pure black and white terms, but yet, one of their blind spots is a lack of mercy. I think it takes a bit if gall to go around constantly saying that the bride of someone else is a whore.
rick, i’m not sure what the point is of bring up revelation 2 and 3, the churches therein, and asking if i think any churches today are significantly backslidden and spiritually blind
of course there are. no one is saying there are not. all i am doing is challenging your declaration that the western church is a failure, that she is a harlot.
as jerry said, this is hyperbole. it may be as jerry says, maybe your experiences are too limited… or it may be as you say, maybe you are just projecting onto the western church as a whole (as if there were even such a monthilic thing to begin with) your own personal failures, experiences, and frustrations.
i do not know.
but to say the western church is a failure and a harlot (as if it were somehow worse than others) is to deny historical and present realities.
pboy – most is way too subjective… are you talking about everyone who says they are christian (culturally or otherwise) or those who truly are believers?
you almost made a salient point, but you could not resist the temptation to once again create a straw-man.
though i must congratulate for comment 139…
#140–Like.
if this were what he was doing – but he is not. he is calling the whole western church a harlot… there is no “certain parts.”
now, pboy, he certainly revels is calling out certain parts – and every once in a while he is even correct and biblical about it… but most of the time his standard is his own modernist methodology and the harlots are any who deviate from that.
Well, understood… I guess I was operating under the assumption that the Church universal is still bigger than whatever the term “western Church” means.
phil, true enough. we should probably stick to referencing the universal church and local churches – and skip the intermediate labels. that would resolve much.
Rick,
I promise you I am not trying to ridicule you, I am honestly just trying to understand your position. I don’t understand it to this point, and I am trying to see if you think that there is anyone (yourself included) who is actually living out the mission of Christ.
Rick,
I promise you I am not trying to ridicule you, I am honestly just trying to understand your position. I don’t understand it to this point, and I am trying to see if you think that there is anyone (yourself included) who is actually living out the mission of Christ.
“all i am doing is challenging your declaration that the western church is a failure, that she is a harlot.”
You are not challenging my declaration. You are challenging me personally.
“maybe your experiences are too limited… or it may be as you say, maybe you are just projecting onto the western church as a whole (as if there were even such a monthilic thing to begin with) your own personal failures, experiences, and frustrations.”
That does not address the issue. That is designed to analyze me not what I say.
Of c ourse when I say “western church” I do not mean every single individual or every single church. That is a straw man that should not be made in a fair discussion. I mean, of course, to address the overwhelming spiritual ambiance of the western ecclesiastical structure and practice.
after all this back and forth, after all the questions i have answered for you, you sieze on some speculation and accuse me of challenging you personally… after you called me blind you say i am being personal?
i am sorry. those comments were purely speculative and designed only to open the door as to why you have such negative opinions about the churches of the west. it was my intent to challenge the position from which you assume your judgments not analyze you.
“why you have such negative opinions about the churches of the west”
Perhaps they are accurate?
i see no point in discussing this further. as i said to phil, there is really only two entities that can be analyzed – the universal church and local churches. we are doing neither.
as pboy pointed out regarding the ot and i pointed out regarding the nt – only rogue individuals within churches are ever called harlots.
The word “harlot” is just a sensationalistic way of saying unfaithful to Christ and His Word.
So replace “harlot” with “unfaithful”.
ok – but that does not change anything i said in 152.
Mars Hill Michigan- Harlot- Pastor is unfaithul to the Word of God. Co- Pastor is unfaithful to the Word of God. Elders do not remove Pastor. Harlot.
Saddleback Church- California- Harlot. Pastor unfaithful to the Word of God. Uplifts values of entertainment and watering down word of God to please people rather than God.
Solomons Porch- Harlot- engages in anti-Biblical practices such as Yoga. Approves of homosexual lifestyle and divorce of leaders in the church.
ELCA- Harlot- Does not esteem the Word of God in faith and practice. Allows women Pastoral staff. Allows homosexuals to be Pastoral staff.
Revolution NYC- Harlot- Supports and defends homosexual lifestyle above the Bible.
I could go on and on with specific examples. I am a harlot when I am not obedient to the Word of God and when I trust my self above God.
i just love the process of pointing out the so-called sins of others… coupled with the feigned (yes feigned) all encompassing confession at the end.
by your definition every believers plays the harlot, so your rant fails both on accuracy and relevance.
we should add to the list those who play the harlot by limiting worship styles, by limiting evangelism techniques to those used in modernist times, those who play the harlot by twisting the words of a fellow believers for the express purpose of accusing them before the brethren and the world, we should add those who mock the suffering of others and enforce on other cultures the exrtabiblical dictates and preferences we possess.
#156 Well, Neil…you said this…other cultures the exrtabiblical dictates and preferences we possess.
What is extrabiblical about anything I said.
i was not specifically thinking of anything you said in 155. i had in mind other cases we’ve argued as well as our favorite odm’s. but since you mention it the only extra-biblical charge you bring is that of practicing yoga, but that is not being applied to another culture since all those mentioned are within our own greater culture.
i was not responding to your list as much as making one of my own.
River of Life Alliance Church–Harlot–Pastor is a unloving, graceless hypocrite who only loves those who think like he does. Defends a graceless ‘gospel’.
Kind of sucks, doesn’t it John?
Ouch.
#160 – John believes what he says. Unless you honestly believe what you wrote, your comment is reactionary and returning evil for evil.
had pboy stuck to just saying those who clearly abandon the historical faith are harlots, i’d say jerry’s response was overly sharp.
but pboy went beyond that and called some harlots based on style and methodology – not biblical content. his examples became absurd.
jerry was simply illustrating the absurdity with absurdity of his own.
that pboy believes all he says is as tragic as it is irrrlevant.
#160 Thank you, Jerry. I am happy to receive words like that from you. May God bless you.
I have been very specific and could get more specific about all of those examples. For example, Mars Hill Church in Michigan has nothing to do with methodology, it has to do with the Christ-less anti-Biblical ‘gospel’ that they proclaim. Just look at the Gospel according to Rob Bell video. Just look at Shane Hipp’s sails illustration. No Gospel. Harlotry. This is indeed an adulterous generation.
#162, I don’t care if John believes it. America promises John the right to say it. It doesn’t mean it’s true.
And, frankly, I do believe that is true of John. All one has to do is look at what is said here in these threads.
164, don’t be too happy to receive them.
There’s a resident in our hospital that believes he can fly. Couple of days ago, they had to restrain the him to his bed because he kept trying to get up on things and jump down to prove it.
i said “some” – some of your examples were methodology based.
pboy showed his manner of critiquing ministries during the dan kimble thread.