Toby J. Sumpter's Blog, page 68

Lifted Up For All of It

[image error]Think of this table as a picture of all that God gives us. We are at God’s table now, but there is a sense in which we are never absent from God’s table. All that we have is from God, and therefore, it is all meant to be food for us.

So, what must we do with the gifts of God? This meal teaches us. We give thanks for them and share them. In a moment I will give thanks for the bread and the wine, and then we will share them, remembering Christ, proclaiming Christ, sharing Christ. So too we must all do the same with the gifts we receive day by day. Give thanks, remember, share.

But what about the hardships? What about sickness? What about uncertainty, strained relationships? Everything comes from the Lord, and we are continually at His table. Will you complain at the Lord’s table? Is Christ a poor host? A poor cook? No, He is the best host, the perfect cook, and He continually prepares a table for you.

So think about your week, your month, your year, your life. Grab hold of it in your head and in your heart – all of it – the good things, the hard things, messy things, and when I lift up the bread in a minute, I want you to lift it all up to God in Christ. You are not lifting it up on your own. You are lifting it all up in Christ who was lifted up for all of it. He was lifted up on the cross in order to draw all men to Himself. And this drawing of all men to Himself included you and it included all that is in you, all that you are. How could Christ draw you to Himself if it did not include your pain, your suffering, your failures, your uncertainty, your fear? It had to include all of it.

So when I lift up the bread, you lift up your lives, your tomorrows, your yesterdays, your everything. And when I give thanks, you give thanks for your life in Christ. Believe in Christ, trust Him for all of it, and give thanks to Him for all of it. And then as I break the bread and the men begin to pass it around, and you pass the trays down the rows, ask God to show you how to share what He has given to you. These are the gifts of God.

So Come and Welcome to Jesus Christ.

 

Photo by Dev on Unsplash

Destroyed Jeans & Genes

[image error]A couple weeks back, I tweeted this: “We’ve been paying premiums for decades for ripped jeans and torn looks. It cannot come as a great shock when we begin paying doctors to try to rip our genes with hormone therapies and genital mutilation. Ripped & torn, nipped & tucked, we hate the image of God.”

A few folks thought that this was outrageous — that either I was implying that it was a sin to wear ripped jeans and thus binding consciences or that I was making some kind of gigantic, farcical leap of logic. Now, I certainly grant that I was taking two or three stairs at a time, but I want to briefly lay out the case for why what I said is entirely on point.

We can retire the first concern fairly quickly: I did not say nor do I believe that wearing ripped jeans is a sin. It certainly could be a sin, and I do think buying pre-ripped (“destroyed”) jeans is almost always thoughtless support of a cultural movement that is rebellious and pagan. But I fully understand that plenty of folks have come about their rips honestly (hard work) or are just wearing what they pulled out of the drawer this morning and have no intention of supporting neo-paganism.

But Christians should be thoughtful people, seeking to love God with all of their minds. This implies studying, thinking, and reasoning. And this means that we need to be students of God’s word and students of our world. We need to read the Word, and we need to read the culture. For today, I simply want to ask: what does our culture say about ripped jeans?

Our culture says that ripped jeans — as a fashion statement — emerged in the 1970s and 80s in the punk rock movement with bands like the Ramones and the Sex Pistols. Joey Ramone wore his ripped jeans almost literally as a fashion-statement-middle-finger. The Sex Pistols were the front for Vivienne Westwood and Malcom McLaren’s designer clothing shop: SEX. Westwood and McLaren popularized the ripped and torn look, modeled off of “fetish wear that they sold to prostitutes” and “those with ‘underground’ sexual tastes.”¹ When SEX was later renamed Seditionaries, it continued “in the same risqué territory as the clothes sold in SEX, featuring the likes of bondage trousers. A punk archetype, these trousers mix references to army combat gear, motorcyclists’ leathers and fetish wear, and feature a zippered seam under the crotch, a removable ‘bum flap’ and ‘hobble’ straps that restrict movement. Other key looks that expressed a new ‘distressed’ form of fashion included loose-woven, ‘unravelling’ mohair jumpers and torn-looking dresses and tops decorated with metal chains and safety pins.”²

Take note: Vivienne Westwood and Malcom McLaren introduced the “distressed” look to popular culture based on the fashion archetypes of sexual deviance. This was not an agenda-free move. They did this for reasons.

Situationism was another contributing factor in this movement in culture and fashion. Situationism was rooted in a Marxist reading of culture that basically said people are primarily influenced by their circumstances/situations, which are largely capitalist constructs that create discontent and envy. The appropriate response to every capitalist construct is to tear it down, rip it up, and expose its insincerity. Situationism wanted to tear down fake presentations in order to arrive at what it considered genuine or authentic. So punk fashion intentionally embraced ripped jeans and torn looks in order to embody this ideology.

“Punk style’s most enduring legacy can’t be boiled down to a particular item of clothing, or even the popularity of distressed jeans and dyed hair. It’s more about the idea of being authentic, that if you do your own thing and dress your own way, you can make the world change around you.”³

Sexual promiscuity and deviance have been at the center of the fashion industry’s introduction of ripped and torn clothing from the beginning. This has included sadomasochism of various stripes. It turns out that when you rip open the so-called capitalist facade, beneath it lurks a fiendish frenzy of “authentic” self-destruction. It really should not be any surprise that this fashion of self-mutilation has morphed most recently into boutique hormone therapies and nip and tuck sex-change operations.

If the promise of authenticity is found in tearing down the facade of reality in order to remake the world according to your own personal whims, what is more fundamental to reality than the image of God?

 

¹ https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/vivien... (HT: Bekah Merkle on Vivienne Westwood)

² Ibid.

³ https://pitchfork.com/features/from-o...

Feature Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

Do Not Lose Heart

[image error]We are under attack. The assaults of the devil and the enemies of God come at us on every side, but particularly in the areas of sexuality and marriage. This is why you so frequently hear encouragements and admonitions from this pulpit to stand firm, to love your wife, to respect your husband, to cultivate biblical joy in your homes, to stay pure, to honor the marriage bed.

“And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart” (Gal. 6:9). You face daily attacks in your families, at your places of work, in classrooms, in the media and online. You are mocked. You are lied to. You are tempted.

And you must not lose heart. You must not doubt in the dark what you knew in the light. So what is it that we know in light? We know that God is light and there is no darkness in Him at all. We know that our hearts are dark, and that our impulses are to selfishness, slavery, and destruction. Our hearts cannot be trusted. To follow your heart is to walk down a dark and slippery path toward a sure and certain cliff.

Paul says elsewhere that marriage is one of God’s great solutions to sexual sin. If you are married do not withhold from one another, do not be distant. Men pursue your wives attentively, be continually satisfied with them, and wives, receive your husbands graciously. Paul says that failure here leaves room for the devil. If you are not married and wrestle with temptation, seek out godly counsel, but above all else prayerfully seek to become the godliest man or woman you can be, prayerfully pursuing marriage. Talk to your children about temptation, talk to them about the lies being fed to us constantly. Fathers, do not be distant from your children. Delight in them, laugh with them, teach them, talk with them. Mothers, do not be harsh or coddling.

We are under attack. But God created this world. He made us male and female. Do not be ashamed of this glory. Embrace your duties with joy. These are not merely gifts; they are weapons of light. We will reap in due season if we do not lose heart.

God in His mercy has come for us in our darkness. There is no sin or failure that is too dark for the light of Jesus to drive away.

 

Photo by Braden Collum on Unsplash

Bloodlust in a Bonnet: Why God Requires 2-3 Witnesses

[image error]So over the last weekend I came across one Mr. Kyle Howard tweeting about the pastoral dangers of waving the banner that justice requires 2-3 witnesses. In the course of his short Twitter sermon he proceeded to try to explain away the clearest passages in Scripture that require 2-3 witnesses as primarily having to do with capital crimes/death sentences, excommunication, or protecting against false witnesses. He’s actually close to the truth with this last point, but he vastly underestimates its prevalence and therefore limits its applicability.

Now, the first thing to note is that Mr. Howard is apparently not aware that according to the Bible and the western law tradition verified physical evidence constitutes legitimate “testimony.” In Dt. 22, the “tokens of virginity” are cited as evidence when there are no other eye witnesses besides a man and a woman. The “third witness” in this instance would be some confirmation that this man was with this woman at this time. Even in 1 Kings 3:16-28, a passage that Mr. Howard cites as example of a court case without witnesses, he has missed the fact that there are two witnesses/testimonies (the disputing prostitutes) whose testimony agree on the basic facts (one baby died), there is also the fact of a dead baby and a living baby, constituting another testimony that a crime has occurred (theft of the living baby). But the dispute is whose baby is the living baby, and that’s where there isn’t a witness/testimony to decide the case. And Solomon’s wisdom is seen in evoking yet another “witness” in the disparate responses of women at his suggestion that the baby be divided. 2-3 witnesses. Check.

The worst moment in Mr. Howard’s thread is his attempt to pass Dt. 19:15 off as merely related to capital offenses. But Dt. 19:15 could not be clearer: “One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established” (Deut. 19:15). One witnesses shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, any sin. Not just capital cases, not just death penally cases, any iniquity, any sin. From capital cases all the way down to two first graders quarreling on the playground.

[image error]Now the heart of Mr. Howard’s concern is that beating this drum of multiple witnesses is discouraging to the real victims of abuse. He writes: “If you state publicly that you require 2-3 witnesses for a sex crimes to be credible; you’re telling every person in your congregation who has been or will be sexually assaulted that you’ll not believe them & they should not be believed cuz of the Bible’s expectations of justice.” I understand that concern, and so we should regularly also make it clear that anyone who has been violated or assaulted in any way should report it to the proper authorities (police, parents, elders, boss, etc). As I stated in my reply to Mr. Howard, the Bible does not require 2-3 witnesses to report a crime. It requires 2-3 witnesses to charge someone with a crime and convict them.

But, Mr. Howard, the Bible clearly requires this standard, and this standard is the best possible standard for victims. God is the defender of the orphan, the widow, and the stranger. His standard is the best for those without protection. And let me try to explain why:

In my reply to Mr. Howard I said “By your exegesis we’ll be back to mob lynching shortly.” And this is exactly the point. Frequently, decent, law-abiding people simply lack the imagination of evil-doers. Proverbs says that they plot evil in their hearts. Among the things the Lord hates are a “heart that devises wicked imaginations, feet that are swift in running to mischief, a false witness that speaks lies, and that sows discord among brethren” (Prov. 6:18-19). Psalm 2 describes the nations plotting vain things. This is not just something that happens in the movies and in the Bible. Wicked men and women really do plot mischief.

So what could go wrong with raising an unsubstantiated accusation? You, the victim, are utterly helpless in the face of any and all pushback, threats, revenge, payoffs, and political ploys. The truth is what keeps us safe, and the truth is what sets people free. And the truth is protected by independent, corroborating testimony/evidence. But mobs are irrational, insane, bloodthirsty, and fickle. If there are no witnesses, if there is no corroborating evidence what is left but emotion and subjective feelings? I feel that he is telling the truth. I feel that she is telling the truth. But this is like throwing knives in the dark.

We live in an age that has largely granted sainthood to accusers, but we need to be fully aware of the fact that just because the wind is blowing one direction right now, disassembling the ancient dam of justice requiring 2-3 witnesses leaves us utterly vulnerable when the winds shift back the other way. In fact, even the current “victim culture” is all a massive optical illusion and sham. Right now if you bring an accusation against a liberal darling the media dutifully ignores the claim. Not all accusations are created equal you see. You are a useful victim if you can be weaponized against whatever it is that we just now decided is the big bad horrible thing that we must protest.

But the irrational protests, the senseless attacks, the vicious smears are like lightning looking for a conductor. And anything will do, including inconvenient accusers. If your abuse, if your mistreatment is not useful to our cause, you will be persistently ignored, and if you have the audacity not to let it drop, you will shortly be shamed, attacked, maligned, and cyber lynched. And if there is no evidence at all, it is just your word against hers, your word against his, your plea against the shrieking mob. At best this is Russian roulette, at worst you’re just signing up for a ride through the media meat grinder.

Shall we #believewomen? Shall we? Where are all the articles and stories interviewing all of the women who #standwithKavanaugh? Oh, their voices are not as important? Huh. I wonder why. It turns out that this Animal Farm madness means that some women are more believable than others. Some voices are more equal than others. And this is what happens when justice is reduced to accusations, charges, claims without evidence, without 2-3 witnesses.

If you charge a powerful person with serious wrongdoing, God knows that this puts you in a massively vulnerable spotlight. The piranhas will circle. In His wisdom and kindness, He requires 2-3 witnesses as much for the protection of the accuser, the victim, as He does for the accused. Lack of 2-3 witnesses does not mean that a crime cannot be reported, but the 2-3 witness threshold provides ongoing protection for victims. Sometimes this will mean that there will not be enough testimony/evidence to charge or convict, and these instances must be left at the final judgment seat of Christ who will not let any sin go unpunished. But those who claim to want to defend victims need to recognize that their zeal to run victims into the face of the mobs without the protections of 2-3 witnesses is not actually zeal for justice at all. Despite all the sweet tears and pious protests, there is some deep rot at the heart, some masochistic bloodlust all bundled up in a frilly victorian bonnet.

Greater Sin for Men

[image error]Murmuring and discontentedness is too much in the weakest, yet we can bear it sometimes in children and women who are weak, but for those who are men, men of understanding, who have wisdom, whom God employs in public service, that they should be discontented with everything, is an exceedingly great evil. For men, to whom God has given gifts and wisdom, when things fall out amiss in their families, to be always murmuring and repining, is a greater sin than for women and children to do it.

-Jeremiah Burroughs, The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment, 178.

 

Photo by Quinten de Graaf on Unsplash

Death By Baptism

[image error]Very thankful to announce the release of a new ebook by yours truly. This is a collection of 66 meditations on baptism, which you can now purchase here for one dolla.

Certain Victory

[image error]This is not a sad meal. This is a victory feast. This is the sign of our ransom, the tokens of our redemption, the proof that we have been set free, evidence that Christ has won and His righteousness will be revealed to the ends of the earth.

This is our weekly thanksgiving meal, what the older church called the Eucharist. Our Jesus is not dead. He is not suffering anymore. He suffered once for all for our sins, and having suffered, bled, and died, He satisfied the exact terms of our justice. His blood paid the wages of all our sin. And having accomplished this, He rose up victorious over sin, death, and the devil, alive forever and sat down at the right hand of the Father where He reigns forever, putting every enemy beneath His feet, putting everything right.

We celebrate this meal not imagining Jesus still on the cross. We celebrate this meal with Jesus crowned in glory in heaven. And therefore, we do not celebrate this meal with any uncertainty about how the story will turn out. We do not pretend that we do not know. We celebrate this meal precisely because we do know. We know the rest of the story. Jesus is risen from the dead, Jesus is seated in Heaven as the King of all Kings, the Lord of all Lords. We know how this story goes.

So, in the face of cultural and political turmoil, in the face of millions of babies murdered, in the face of justice miscarried, in the face of defiant sexual deviance, in the face of hardship, uncertainty, sickness, loneliness, and even in the face of death itself, we give thanks together here and share this bread and wine, proclaiming the death of our King by which He has purchased our salvation and inherited the ends of the earth for His possession. These are the tokens of His victory, the signs and seals of our redemption, and the absolute certainty of His justice filling this world.

We do not yet see all things put beneath His feet, but we do see Jesus and in Him, we see all things put right. This is our victory, even our faith.

SoCome and Welcome to Jesus Christ.

 

Photo by JESHOOTS.COM on Unsplash

Blameless Job

[image error]Job is introduced as a man from the land of Uz who was “blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil” (1:1). Job is a perfect man, an Adam in an Eden-garden. Job is described as “blameless” like Noah (Gen. 6:9), Jacob (Gen. 25:27), and David (1 Kgs. 9:4). The is the same word used to describe those animals to be offered as sacrifices. They must be “perfect” or “without blemish” (Ex. 12:5; Lev. 1:3). This is the standard to which Abraham is urged by the Lord (Gen. 17:1) and refers not to a state of sinless perfection but integrity, honesty, and loyalty to God…

Not only is Job a faithful Adam, he is also immediately described as a fruitful Adam. Job has been fruitful and has multiplied. He has seven sons and three daughters. His possessions are great: seven thousand sheep, three thousand camels, five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred female donkeys (1:2). Job is an Adam-like king who rules over creation.

– Job Through New Eyes: A Son for Glory, P. 23-24

 

Photo by bhushan bawane on Unsplash

Why Revoice is the Wrong Voice

[image error]Introduction

This last summer, the Revoice Conference was hosted by Memorial Presbyterian Church in St. Louis, MO (PCA). The purpose of the conference as stated on the website is: “Supporting, encouraging, and empowering gay, lesbian, same-sex-attracted, and other gender and sexual minority Christians so they can flourish while observing the historic, Christian doctrine of marriage and sexuality.” Included in the talks was one workshop asking: What queer treasure will be brought into the New Jerusalem? Revoice and the related Gay Celibate Christian movement seek a way to identify with homosexual temptation while affirming the Bible’s teaching about homosexual practice and Christian marriage.

A Failure to Love Sexual Sinners

I want to frame my critique of this conference and the related ministries (Spiritual Friendship, Livingout dot org, etc) with a critique of the Bible-believing Church as a whole. But I need to state this point carefully. It is trendy to blame the conservative Church for not being loving enough, for forcing those who struggle with sexual sin underground or out of the church.

Revoice is one way to disobey God’s command to minister to sexual sinners, but in many ways, they are merely doing what much of the conservative church has done clumsily. That is, most modern conservative Christian churches fail to love sexual sinners by failing to preach the gospel and the full counsel of God to every sexual sin. I do not believe our sin has been in not being nice or kind or hospitable (though there are no doubt instances of that). Our sin has primarily been in cowardly silence and beating around the bush and embarrassment combined with a fumbling attempt to stay biblical.

But Jesus died a shameful death for shameful sin. If the human race has not committed abominations, then there was no need for Jesus to die a cursed death. And so, I do believe the Christian Church has failed to love sexual sinners, but it has done so primarily through a failure to name sin biblically, preach the gospel into every dark corner of human depravity, and to practice church discipline consistently. The church has not preached the gospel boldly to pornography, fornication, divorce, adultery – nor have we practiced consistent church discipline in these areas, and so we cannot be shocked when we fall down the next step of the staircase of sexual confusion.

Ten Failures of Revoice & the Gay Celibate Christian Movement

Muddled and contradictory language throughout, starting with the mission statement. How do you empower sinful identities to flourish while observing the historic, Christian doctrines of marriage and sexuality? How do you empower sin to be holy? If the answer to that question is anything other than repentance, we’re in trouble. What other gender and sexual minorities would Revoice be willing to include? Would they say that they want to empower pedophiles? What about those tempted to bestiality? What about those tempted to incest? What pedophile treasure will be brought into the New Jerusalem? To ask the question is to answer it. But the Bible actually tells us: “For without [the city] are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie” (Rev. 22:15, cf. Dt. 23:18). Other examples of muddled language can be found in a recent “Church Audit” published on the Livingout dot org website: “Your church family meetings include people who could be labeled LGBTQI+/same-sex attracted.” The ambiguities are rampant. “Include?” “Could be labeled as?” What is that “plus sign?” Are they included forever in any way? Is Church discipline an “inclusive” practice? Another statement from the audit: “Church family members instinctively share meals, homes, holidays, festivals, money, children with others from different backgrounds and life situations to them.” Without clear distinctions, the muddle creates real awkwardness if not terrifying naivete. Are same-sex tempted men sharing homes together? Are parents being encouraged to share their children with pedophile-tempted adults?
The assumption built into the Revoice mission statement and in most of the Gay but Celibate literature is that there is some way of identifying with these sins without actually practicing them. The assumption seems to be that there is something inherently good about the inclination/orientation that should be redeemed while rejecting the lifestyle. But this is like trying to affirm the seed while rejecting the plant. But Paul says, “Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:11). There is no suggestion or inference in Scripture that the impulse/temptation to sin carries within it something inherently good, something to be appreciated or celebrated. Sin is to be uprooted, completely mortified/killed (Col. 3:1ff). The impulse/temptation (inside us) to sin is a result of our fallen nature (Js. 1:14-15). Jesus was tempted in every way just as we are, but without sin – but his experience of temptation was only from the outside.
These movements have a strong tendency to flatten out all sexual sin. E.g. “We are all sexually broken,” etc. But the Bible clearly teaches that some sexual sins are the result of previous sin. “The mouth of the strange women is a deep pit; he that is abhorred of the Lord shall fall therein” (Prov. 22:14). “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves…” (Rom. 1:21-24). Adultery is a judgment from God, and homosexuality is a judgment from God. There is a certain kind of hard-hearted rebellion that results in same-sex lust. It is true that all sexual sin equally deserves death and is therefore equally justified in the sight of God by the blood of Christ, but it is not true that all sexual sin is therefore equally vile or damaging. Some sexual sins are more unnatural, and therefore cause more damage in this world, requiring more sanctification/restitution to put right.
Related, is the failure to name sexual sins biblically. “You shall not lie with a male, as with a woman: it is an abomination. Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it. It is perversion/confusion. Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you. For the land is defiled; therefore I visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it, and the land vomits out its inhabitants” (Lev. 18:22-25). “If a man lies with a male as he lies with with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them… (Lev. 20:13-16). “There shall be no harlot of the daughters of Israel or a [male prostitute] of the sons of Israel. You shall not bring the wages of a harlot or the price of a dog [slang for male prostitute] to the house of the Lord your God for any vowed offering, for both of these are an abomination to the Lord your God” (Dt. 23:17-18). Putting these texts together with the prophets, particularly Jeremiah and Ezekiel, I conclude that abominations are the sort of sins that defile the land. They are particularly infectious and socially polluting, requiring God to swiftly judge whole nations (cf. Jer. 4:1, 6:15, 8:12, 32:34-36ff). Speaking of the New Jerusalem, John says, “But there shall by no means enter it anything that defiles, or causes an abomination or a lie, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life” (Rev. 21:27). “For this reason, God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting…” (Rom. 1:26-28). The word for “vile” literally means “dishonorable,” and likewise, the word “shameful” is used in the Old Testament Septuagint to translate the word “nakedness” (e.g. Lev. 20) as well as unclean excrement (Dt. 23:13-14). Finally, as noted earlier, the Bible refers to homosexuals as “dogs,” highlighting the beastly nature of these acts. Naming is act of submission to God and a means of exercising godly authority in the world. If the Church would embrace it’s calling to rule over these sexual confusions, we must name them biblically.
Revoice and related ministries fail to condemn the sin of effeminacy and softness: “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves… shall inherit the kingdom of God…” (1 Cor. 6:9-10). The queer will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. The word for “effeminate” is malakoi, and the word means “soft.” Robert Gagnon argues persuasively that this word does refer to passive partners in sodomy, but it can also include a man feminizing his appearance and manner. The only other use of the word in the New Testament is in the gospels where Jesus asks about John the Baptist and whether they would expect to find him in a king’s palace wearing “soft” clothes (Mt. 11:8, Lk. 7:25). Related, is the Bible’s prohibition against crossdressing: “A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the Lord your God” (Dt. 22:5). The synonymous word in Hebrew is rak which means soft, tender, or fainthearted (cf. Dt. 20:8, 2 Chron. 13:7). This is also why the Bible describes men who grow fainthearted in battle as acting like women (Is. 19:16, Jer. 51:30). The failure of men to embrace their glory to be strong, and to use their strength to do the good things God has assigned them and protect the weak is the sin of effeminacy.
Revoice and similar ministries often fail to emphasize the fact that Christians are new creations in Christ, with sexed bodies given as specific gender assignments. “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new” (2 Cor. 5:17). Some, like Sam Allberry, are eager to emphasize identity in Christ, yet sometimes, this “identity in Christ” effectively de-sexes individuals. But finding your identity in Christ means a sanctification of your created body and its attendant gendered assignments. Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit. If God created you with a male body, He has given you an assignment to live in this world as a man. If God gave you a female body, He has given you an assignment to live in this world as a woman. This means, to put it frankly, because of this binary sexed nature of human beings made in the image of God, all human interaction in this world is inherently heterosexual. There is only one obedient orientation and it is heterosexual. This affects everything from child-rearing to brother/sister relationships, to business and professional relationships to courting and marriage. And everything in between. Holding doors for women, being ready and willing to defend women and children, standing when a woman enters the room – these are ways we signal honor for the heterosexuality of the world. These are ways that the marriage bed is honored by all (Heb. 13:4). Being “in Christ” does not obliterate those good, creational differences and assignments. “There is neither male nor female in Christ” is speaking specifically about justification and the fact that all have an equal inheritance in Christ, but that fact that Paul can also say that women must not teach men or have authority over them but love the fruitfulness of childbearing because Adam was created first clearly indicates that these sexed creational realities have not been obliterated (1 Tim. 2). This also clearly indicates that there are only two sexes (Gen. 1:27, Mk. 10:6).
Bad homosexual genealogies: what is the origin of homosexual desire? “For this cause God gave them up to vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another…” (Rom. 1:26-27) The origin of homosexual desire is a rejection of heterosexual desire. It is not a desire for same sex friendship. It is a rejection of what is embedded in nature. This desire may certainly be driven by deep hurts or abuses or loneliness. But the Bible gives no indication that there is some kind inherent gift or glory in not embracing the natural glory of being made male/female in the image of God and therefore oriented toward heterosexual marriage.
Frequently, the space that these folks are seeking to carve out is found in the categories of celibacy, friendship, and singleness. I believe this is a pastoral noose and a burden that is too heavy for many to bear. First, in some of the Spiritual Friendship writings, there is reference to lifelong covenants, buying houses together, vacationing, and even raising children together as “just friends.” But this is just as foolish as a man and woman doing the same thing as “just friends.” God has made the world such that certain liturgies, rituals create a certain kind gravity. You can’t be “just friends.” And while it’s certainly possible for two men or two women to be “just friends” this needs to be done without practicing certain rituals/liturgies that signify marriage or romance. But some of the Revoice folks are actually saying that it’s perfectly fine to “date” your same-sex friends, snuggle on the couch, and hold hands. This is pure folly. Two dudes sharing an apartment together should live as men and avoid any appearance of effeminacy. But all of that folly is built on the assumption that many same-sex tempted Christians just won’t or shouldn’t get married. But this is contrary to the teaching of Scripture. “But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: it is good for them if they remain even as I am; but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion (1 Cor. 7:8-9). What does it mean to “burn with passion?” I submit that it refers to anyone with any sort of ongoing, regular temptation to sexual sin. If you have any sort of temptation toward sexual sin, you ought to seek marriage. One of the common rejoinders to this is that Paul is clearly talking about heterosexually tempted people not homosexually tempted people. But this is to assume that the origin of homosexual temptation is fundamentally different that heterosexual temptation. But as we have seen, homosexual temptation is derived from a rejection of heterosexual orientation (Rom. 1). And interestingly, Paul describes homosexual lust as “burning” (Rom. 1:27). It’s a different Greek word, but it’s lexically synonymous. In Romans 1, it is clear that repentance for homosexual lust would be to return to the right and natural use of the sexes. And that is only expressed sexually in marriage. As Paul also says in 1 Cor. 7:5, marital sexual relations is one of the ways God protects His people from the temptations of Satan. None of this is an excuse for rushing into marriage imprudently, and it certainly remains a live possibility that some who seek marriage will not find a spouse. But in either case, we may confidently say that individuals who experience sexual temptation of any kind ought to be carefully pastored toward Christian marriage.
One of the great failures of this movement is the frequent lack of distinction between reigning (justification) and remaining sin (sanctification). From the Livingout church audit: “No-one would be pressured into expecting or seeking any ‘healing’ or change that God has not promised any of us until the renewal of all things.” The rhetorical effect of this (whether intentional or not) is certainly to discourage expecting much healing. But the truth is that the gospels proclaim a marked deliverance from the power of reigning sin in every believer, while recognizing the ongoing battle with remaining sin (Rom. 6:11-12, Col. 3:1-4ff). This ambiguity is hardly surprising since many within the “Spiritual Friendship” movement are Roman Catholic. Roman Catholicism does not recognize the Protestant/biblical distinction between justification and sanctification. This is why Roman Catholicism (and Eastern Orthodoxy) have such a difficult time articulating a doctrine of eternal security by grace. It’s impossible not to feel the weight of sanctification as your necessary contribution to your salvation, especially when you believe that you lose your justification when you sin (according to the Catholic catechism). But the Bible teaches that justification means a radical new and permanent identity in Christ along with the destruction of the power of reigning sin, and from that firm rock of Christ, an all-out war against remaining sin commences with an absolutely sure victory in view because of the cross. It is a serious mistake for Protestants to make an alliance with Roman Catholics when it comes to proclaiming the gospel to those ensnared by sexual sin.
Finally, one of the great errors of evangelicalism (for many decades) has been the assumption that experience with sin grants authority to speak on it. So adulterers or divorcees are sometimes granted authority to speak or even ordained as ministers because we think their experience in sin (and presumably repentance/forgiveness) somehow makes them understand those sins better. But this is not true at all. Jesus is our Great High Priest who sympathizes with us in our weakness. But He understands us better than anyone else precisely because He did not give into any sin. So too, those who remain firm and resist sin and preserved by God, are in a better position to lead and serve and teach the church than those burdened by temptations and past sins (Gal. 6:1, Lk. 7:41-42). While God is free to raise up the occasional Saul of Tarsus, and I would not automatically disqualify a man from office because of past homosexual temptation, our instinct should not be to grant authority to those who have fallen. They need our love, our care, true friendship, church discipline, but they do not need to be made authorities. But this is precisely what many of these men and women are clamoring for. Nate Collins, the founder of Revoice, spoke in his talk at this year’s conference about the idea that “LGBT Christians” were something like lonely prophetic voices calling the Church to faithfulness. But there is a massive difference between refugees of the world and apostles of the world. The former are welcome and the latter are not. The Christian Church must not submit to men and women who are struggling with these sins, or bow to their dominant narratives (e.g. they cannot be healed, many cannot marry, etc.). You do not turn the cancer ward over to the cancer patients. We certainly must listen to them, but they are not authorities on their sin. God and His Scriptures remain our perfect authority. Extreme patience and prudence should be practiced, but three (or fifteen) sad stories do not render Scripture incompetent to address our needs. God’s Word remains true and absolutely sufficient.

 

Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash

Covenantal Contentment

[image error]Phil. 4:4-13

Introduction

Christians are called to contentment not merely because this is a good thing, but because it is a central component of joining God’s mission, of establishing His Kingdom here in this world, and learning to fight like Christians.

The Text: Paul is writing in a context of intense struggle in Philippi. There are enemies outside and there are challenges inside the Church, and Paul urges the Philippians to rejoice in al lof it (Phil. 4:4). A Christian should be known for being calm and stable because they know that the Lord is present and near to them (Phil. 4:5). And therefore, we fight all anxiety through prayer: casting our cares on Christ, with thanksgiving (Phil. 4:6). When we pray like that, God’s promise is that His peace which passes all understanding will guard our hearts and minds through Christ (Phil. 4:7). This joyful resting in Christ is marked by a disciplined thought life: keeping a common place book of all the good things, true things, just things, lovely things, etc. (Phil. 4:8). This attentiveness should include imitating mature Christians like Paul – this too is the path of God’s peace (Phil. 4:9). Finally, Paul models this joyful contentment by expressing his delight in the gift he recently received from the Philippians (Phil. 4:10). He was truly thankful but certainly not desperate for the gift because he had learned to be content in every situation because Christ strengthens him (Phil. 4:11-13).

Knowing God

Contentment in God requires that you actually know the God you are content in. Christian contentment is not contentment in whatever you imagine God to be like. You can say the word “contentment” a whole bunch, but if you are not resting in who God actually is, you are not actually learning Christian contentment. So, who is this God? He is the God who is set on taking this world from glory to glory. We see this beginning in the very first chapter of the Bible. God creates something good, and then He comes back the next day and restructures it and improves it (Gen. 1). If you had been there watching, you might have been tempted to urge God to stop. If the light was good, why make the firmament or the sun, moon, and stars? If the dry ground and seas were good, why add animals and fish? Perhaps the most striking instance of this in the creation week is when God took a perfectly good man and broke him open in order to make something even better. What we see in the creation week is the beginning of God’s pattern of taking good things and making them better. This is the God we rejoice in and remain calm in. This God is not far off. He is near.

The same pattern follows through the rest of Scripture, particularly in God’s covenantal dealings with His people. The covenant with Noah grows into the glory of the covenant with Abraham, and that glory grows into the covenant with Moses, and that glory grows into the covenant with David. The glory of the covenant with David grows into the glory of the covenant under Ezra and Nehemiah, and Christ is the culmination of all the covenants in the New Covenant. Paul says that when we see the gospel unfolding and culminating in Christ, we are being “changed into the same image from glory to glory” (2 Cor. 3:18). The whole Bible is the story of Christ: “Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Lk. 24:26-27). The center of Christian contentment is the cross of Jesus, in which God broke the very best Man in order to remake the whole world in Him.

How Does Covenantal Contentment Pray?

Paul says that Christian contentment is learned through prayer (Phil. 4:6). The pattern for Christian prayer is laid out in the Lord’s Prayer: “Our Father” means that we can cry out to God as the One who made us and cares for us. He is not detached or distant. “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” means that we entrust our stories to His story. He has a plan that He is carrying out in this world that is wonderful, glorious, and all together lovely. His Kingdom and Will are taking this world (and us) from glory to glory. It’s in that context that we are invited to ask God for our daily bread. It’s actually pretty audacious of us to think that we know what we need, but God is our Father and He wants us to ask for what we think we need. But we are to do so first of all “with thanksgiving” (Phil. 4:6). This recognizes that what we have today is already from God’s hand, and whatever God gives for our daily bread is good. Nevertheless, we do want to be learning to pray in the will of God, toward the will of God. We want to pray, as far as we can help it, for those things that we see that would work toward the coming of Christ’s Kingdom. And this is why it is important that all of our requests include a spirit of surrender: yet not my will by Thy will be done (Lk. 22:42, Js. 4:15).

Militant Christian Contentment

Christian contentment is not apathetic, not stoic. Christian contentment, grounded in the mission of God, is militant. “And the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you” (Rom. 16:20). It is not merely that it’s a nice thing to have God’s peace. It is the peace of God that crushes Satan under your feet. When we pray with contentment, the promise is that the peace of God, which passes all understanding will guard our hearts and minds (Phil. 4:7). The peace of God is our armor, our fortress. Paul says elsewhere that we need to wear the gospel of peace on our feet (Eph. 6:15). The peace of Christ is what takes us into battle. You cannot fully participate in the mission of God without the peace of God. This is because the conquest of the gospel is a mission of healing and restoration, not destruction. The gospel is very disruptive to the old world, the old man, the old systems of sin, death, and the devil. But it destroys that slavery, those strongholds in order to establish freedom, joy, and peace. And therefore, you cannot be a peacemaker if you are not already a fortress of peace and contentment. One of the greatest meditations on Christian contentment is The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment by the puritan pastor Jeremiah Burroughs, who preached this series of sermons in the middle of the English Civil War. He understood that for Christians to be useful to God in the middle of political, cultural, or personal turmoil, they must have the peace of Christ.

Conclusions

At the center of our text, Paul says to meditate on the true, honest, just, pure, and virtuous things. In fact, the word means to reckon or impute. It can simply mean to think about, but this is how the word is frequently used: Abraham believed God, and He reckoned it to him as righteousness (Rom. 4:22). Paul goes on: “Now it was not written for his sake alone that it was imputed to him, but also for us. It shall be imputed to us who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead…” (Rom. 4:23-24). God imputes the righteousness of Christ to us who believe in Him, and if you understand that, you begin to imitate that, reckoning your life and this world through Christ, who is our peace, which is gospel war.

 

Photo by Les Anderson on Unsplash