Paul's Passing Thoughts

Another ethical controversy is trending in Churchland, and this time it’s a big one. The following is an excerpt from pulpitandpen.org:

Sam Allberry, who still personally wallows in Same-Sex Attraction (SSA), is the founder of an organization that is fully devoted to the false teaching of so-called, “Gay Christianity.” Unfortunately, many evangelicals support Allberry and his ministry, including The Gospel Coalition and the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC). The most prominent supporter of Allberry’s gay ministry is Dr. Tim Keller, who has been promoting this false gospel that cannot sanctify the homosexual. Unfortunately, it now seems that Mark Dever of 9Marks and Capital Hill Baptist Church can be added to the list of those who support Allberry’s “Gay Christian” ministry.

We recently posted an article, originally by Toni Brown at Bible Thumping Wingnut, on the sinister and gay-affirming teachings of Allberry and Living Out, which you can find here. To be clear, Allberry does not teach that practicing sodomy is acceptable, but rather he teaches that Same-Sex Attraction is not a sin, that homosexuals cannot expect to be changed by the Holy Spirit and given a nature not desirous of sodomy, and that there are elements of “gay culture” that are redeemable and should be celebrated. In Allberry’s view, virtually everything about homosexuality can be embraced except for the act of bodily penetration.

Common in the Living Out subculture, are testimonies of professing Christians who learned to love and embrace, rather than be freed from their homosexuality. Also common are accusations toward the Christian church of “homophobia” and demands that the church soften its views on the sin of sodomy. The organization is an increasingly important factor in re-branding SSA as an itself neutral, non-sinful impulse, and it heavily promotes the idea that it’s okay to be gay so long as one is celibate, going so far as to encourage churches to ordain those who are Same-Sex attracted.

End citation.

Pardon the long excerpt, but it is an apt summary of the newest kerfuffle among evangelicals. And, these controversies have taken a particular turn predicted by this ministry for a long time: those who represent the cutting edge of church will support views that clash with the plain sense of historical-grammatical interpretation. So, presently, you have well-meaning folks in the church who are much like I was for 35 years: utterly perplexed on the one hand, and out to save the church on the other. Though I applaud the efforts of good Christian men like Thomas Littleton, the church is beyond saving. In one of Littleton’s comment streams, which I can’t find right now, so I will paraphrase, someone wrote the following: “We don’t need another book to tell us what the Bible plainly states about homosexuality.”

Breakpoint.

Church orthodoxy has never been about the individual’s understanding of the Bible and how it makes one more like the Father. That’s why it’s orthodoxy. Most people in church, if not all of them, think orthodoxy and truth are synonyms. That’s not the definition of orthodoxy which has its roots in Dualism. Here is another thing Churchians believe: the historical-redemptive and historical-grammatical hermeneutics are hermeneutics; ie., two different ways of interpreting Scripture. And, both work together in order to properly interpret Scripture.

Nope. If you believe that, you are egregiously misinformed, as I was for years. What is the historical-redemptive hermeneutic, where did it come from, and how will it lead Mohler, Dever, MacArthur, Carson, and whomever else to accept homosexuals in the church? We will visit that in the upcoming parts.

Why will good Christians in the church stand perplexed, frustrated, disillusioned, and watch helplessly as this orthodoxy bus rolls down the highway mercilessly running over all discernment bloggers? We will visit that as well.

Either capitulate, or consider alternatives. But protest will accomplish nothing.  More things we will visit.

I am honored to have Thomas Littleton as one of my Facebook friends and he writes some informative stuff on this latest trend. But while reading one of his articles, I was struck by a bolt of lightening. I have read the Calvin Institutes, I have read a bunch of Luther, and did an in-depth series on his Heidelberg Disputation. Yet, what struck me was my lack of remembrance regarding the Reformers addressing homosexuality specifically. I thought that strange. I thought that VERY strange. I started doing a word search that also took etymology into account. Nothing specific turned up. I then turned to my partner in crime for help. Note what he said as a preface to the list of research he presented:

Nothing definitive in these articles, but if you read between the lines you can see they are leaving the door open. Perhaps trying to condition people for acceptance. A subtle conditioning.

It is important to note that the Reformation’s justification by faith gospel interprets sin through a specified prism. That prism, and its logical conclusions, would necessarily call for acceptance of homosexuals into the church with leeway for standards according to church authority. Those standards/arguments presented, as reported by Littleton and others, are indeed consistent with authentic Protestant orthodoxy.

This is the thesis moving forward: the latest trend is consistent with the Reformation’s justification by faith soteriology, orthodoxy, and church authority.

paul

Part 2