I second that…

I third that ! I’ve followed Derek Webb’s controversies for quite some time and I’d love to hear your response.

Thanks so much for posting my link.

Derek Webb’s stance disturbs for a few reasons.

From this interview, he seems to view his role as a Christian as one who offers a medicinal antidote to “issues of culture and life” so people can hopefully “form their own opinions” as opposed to one called to hold forth the Word of Life as given us in Christ Jesus, the One who promises an eternal weight of glory for all who repent, believe and put their faith in Him.

Secondly, he says, “Christians need to see ourselves as the same as those we’re pointing our fingers at,” which is a terribly misguided statement if by such he means that we should “bridge the gap.” Why, the gap has already been “bridged” by the man Christ Jesus. Rather, should we not proclaim to the dead man a gospel that will quicken him to life?

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 says, “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”

Scripture testifies to the distinction between those who have been made clean by the Word and those who are outside. That is not a personal judgment, that is a judgment based upon the ineffable Word of God. Love is not the issue, that is understood. He is mixing up his “we must love people” statements with the charge upon all Christians to love and uphold the Truth, first and foremost.

What Mr. Webb seems to have forgotten is that all the love and sympathy people ever needed hung on a tree. Conversely, all God’s wrath against their sin hung on that same tree. In other words, he shouldn’t work so hard at placating sin as much as he needs to remember that there is a gospel to proclaim.

I fear the man has lost his doctrinal moorings amidst the post-modern conversational sea of meaninglessness. May he find them on his knees in repentance.

Continuing what Elizabeth said, it strikes me that Webb would talk about love so much, yet never talks about salvation. If I had cancer and he had the cure, I wouldn’t be too happy if he just hugged me until I died. A little blunt, but Paul himself said he would rather die a spiritual death than allow anyone of his people die. That is true love.

And we should love people and care for people in the manner that Webb suggests, but that should be an outpouring of the gospel within our lives. An outpouring that should include gospel proclamation.

Lastly, Webb is correct that those Christians oppose are just like us, but he misunderstands how they are like us. They are like us because they are sinners as we once were.

I’m curious too as what you mean by “What he says (and sings) continues to concern.” That leaves a lot of room open for interpretation. Could you expand a little on the position you’re intimating?

Hi Emily,

I understand the questions, and I understand your point. But what must be understood by all is that there is a much larger context at play here that does not get addressed by Derek Webb or the reporter, for that matter, which could leave the reader to take the bagel without the cream cheese, if you know what I mean.

As Christians, we have an obligation both to the wise and to the foolish (Romans 1:14), so I am willing to comment on what I think is a foolish argument as presented in the article by Mr. Webb. As I stated above, the issue is far more than love. Love is understood, or at least it should be. What is at stake is a pure gospel. And he sacrifices that on the altar of “going beyond tolerance” which is a fancy way of saying that he is willing to blur the lines between Truth and lie and call it “understanding.” But a careful reading of 2 Thessalonians will not square with that kind of reasoning.

The kind of love Mr. Webb is promoting is not the undying love Paul spoke of when he referred to sacrificing all for a pure gospel. Instead, it is a counterfeit love that is spreading across the globe in the name of false peace and unity to which Christ and His people will have no part of.

Because in the end, buying someone a coffee at Starbucks while sympathizing with their sin will not win their soul. Only a pure gospel has power to do that.

I do not disagree with you, Emily. In fact, I believe one of the most powerful vehicles we have in reaching others for Christ is our dinner table, whether that be actual or by proxy at a Starbucks. The means by which we avail ourselves is as practical as getting right someone’s name, and truly caring about them beyond our own agenda. Jesus loved and ministered to the whole man.

It’s not my intention to harp, but a careful reading of my earlier points address what is not being taken into account by Mr. Webb, which is a gospel that does not blur the lines between Truth and lie, and presents the full message of Christ, not just half-caf.

Being able to carry a fully-orbed message requires not only the love of God but a full knowledge of the Scriptures, which enables us to, as Paul states in Acts, “declare the whole counsel of God.” http://bit.ly/gKkYkL