Recently a church in my denomination voted, with a 98% congregational vote, to leave the denomination.
It is a well-known church, second (I believe) in size and finances on its district. It has a beautiful building on a prominent street in Oklahoma City.
And, this church, I know something about it. I see it occasionally when I’m in that part of town. I once attended a small conference there.
I know who the pastor is, having met him briefly once or twice many years ago. I even knew his father, who was himself a prominent churchman.
For some time there has been evidence that this church leaned toward liberalism, including on the issue of homosexuality. It appears that they want to be more open and affirming on that issue and that this is their main reason for leaving.
Homosexuality…the dragon slayer of modern American Christianity. All the mainline denominations have fallen before it. Thankfully, most of the evangelicals have said no to it (the practice of homosexuality is, after all, clearly called a sin in the Bible).
When it makes inroads, it usually starts at the educational institutions. Diligence and courage are called for in opposing it.
But what I’m really struck by in this church’s action, and in all churches that weaken on the issue of homosexuality, is that they double down on ‘Jesus talk’ when giving their reasons for doing what they do. They say things like, ‘Jesus loved all unconditionally’, or ‘Jesus affirmed everyone, why shouldn’t we?’
They think they can capitalize on the biblical ignorance of the masses, who might think of Jesus as an inoffensive and easy side of God.
But they get Jesus wrong. The Jesus of scripture is not a blanket affirmer of popular sin. He isn’t an affirmer of sin at all! The biblical Jesus associated with sinners, yes, but not to leave them in their sin. Instead, he associated with them to lead them out of their sin and give them a better life.
In the famous story of the woman caught in adultery (John chapter 8), where Jesus is overwhelmingly forgiving of her past sins, he ended the conversation with the woman by saying “Go now and leave your life of sin,” (verse 11). He forgave her, but didn’t leave her where she was. He called on her to repent.
And repentance was not just for her. It was for everyone. Jesus’ first public words in the Gospel of Mark (the first gospel to be written) were: “‘The time has come,’ he said. ‘The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!'” (Mark 1:15). Repentance was Jesus’ first command.
The Greek word for repentance, metanoia, literally means “a change of mind.” A change. A change in the sinner. If you want the new life that Christ offers (the “good news”) you must be willing to give up your sins. Repentance is a necessary part of that good news.
This is clear, biblical truth. Churches and pastors should know this. God expects them to teach His ways accurately. It’s a serious sin not to.
The Apostle Paul dealt with this issue. A church (Galatia) had gotten off track–though in this case it was in a legalistic rather than a liberal direction. Paul wrote to them: “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!” Galatians 1:6-9.
Three things here:
- 1) Churches should promote the true gospel.
- 2) It is possible to be diverted from promoting that true gospel.
- 3) Those who preach a false gospel will be judged
Churches are not allowed to make things up for themselves. They must preach the gospel on God’s terms. They don’t get to bend the truth in order to accept popular sins. The greatest threat now (in my opinion) is the temptation to affirm homosexuality. In previous ages the prevailing temptation was to affirm some other kind of sin, and in the future it will be something else. The church will always face temptations to compromise–the issues change but the danger is the same.
There will always be enticements to weaken. The devil will make sure of it. We will always be well-supplied with temptations to embrace a different gospel. The church’s task is to identify and refuse these temptations no matter what they are or in what direction they come from. We owe this to God and to our people.
God has entrusted the church with the truth, and it is the most important truth of all. To fail to tell the truth–to tell people that sin is not sin–is a lie, and a very dangerous one.
Churches must pay the price to do the right thing, to be faithful to God no matter how strong the current trends of the culture. If churches are not willing to do this, then they shouldn’t exist.
This is a response I saw to someone’s post, “Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion are Christian values”: “Jesus didn’t eat with sinners and tax collectors because He wanted to appear inclusive, tolerant, and accepting. He ate with them to call them to a changed and fruitful life, to die to self and live for Him. His call is transformation of life, not affirmation of identity.” I think that sums it up nicely…