Welcome to the online home of Tim Challies, blogger, author and web designer. My first book, "The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment," is now available everywhere.

Read about the blog or about the author.

Wednesday July 8, 2009

Idolatry New and Old

A little while ago my friend Ian loaned me the PBS DVD series The Story of India This six-part series, which runs about six hours, simply tells the story of India from ancient times until roughly the time of Indian Independence. It is a good documentary, even if the host’s excessive exuberance toward all things Indian is a little bit hard to take after a while. “Oh, isn’t that wonderful! Fantastic! Remarkable! Unbelievable! Stupendous!”

As one would have to expect for a series focusing on the history and culture of India, this film devoted a good bit of attention to Indian religion. And, as you know, India is a hotbed of religious fervor where Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam and nearly every other religion you can imagine coexist, at times peacefully and at times through great bloodshed. As much as the history of India is the history of faiths existing together in peace, it is equally a story of the battle for dominance of one faith or another. The documentary devoted a good bit of attention to the various means of religious expression, from Muslims venerating the tomb of a sufi to Jains pouring out their offerings to a statue of Gomateshwara to Hindus bowing low before their ancient deities. The idolatry, portrayed so vividly in full-color and wide screen is quite shocking. India represents a fascinating collision of the first world with the third world, of the ancient with the modern. Somehow it seems that this form of idolatry should have been left in the past; have we not evolved or developed or matured beyond bowing before gods of wood and bronze? Yet here are countless millions of men and women who are every bit as devoted to their gods as were the enemies of the Israelites of old.

As I watched these people venerate their gods I felt pity for them and I felt gratitude to God for his grace in saving me from such idolatry, such sinful adulation of Satan. I suppose that may sound arrogant; I do not mean it that way. Here were men and women bowing low before gods who were so clearly made in their own image—gods who were not good and righteous and perfect and omnipotent, but gods who are so often petty and perplexed and perverted—gods who are so very human. There is no transcendence here; there is little to distinguish these gods from those who worship them. These people are, in a very real sense, worshiping themselves. They create gods who are very much like themselves and then prostrate themselves before such pathetic deities. Rarely have I seen such a vivid picture of the idolatry that dwells within the human heart.

Yesterday the world memorialized Michael Jackson. The numbers are still being tabulated but there is little doubt that millions, probably hundreds of millions, watched at least a portion of the memorial service. How many did so, as did I, merely out a morbid sense of curiosity, probably cannot be calculated.

Jackson’s service was an representation of just the kind of pluralism that has marked India. Everybody involved wanted to invoke God’s name, as you’re supposed to do when remembering a loved one, but it was clear that most of them invoked a god made in their own image. Even those who spoke of Jesus or who prayed to Jesus did so without any clear reference to the Jesus of the Bible. They spoke of a Jesus who accepts all and even (or perhaps especially) those who had rejected him. Never did Michael Jackson give any evidence of putting his faith in Jesus Christ, yet those who watched were assured, time and again, that he was now safe in the presence of the Lord, waiting there for the rest of us to arrive. Words and phrases invoked God and used the Christian lexicon but without any reference to the gospel, the true gospel, the gospel that saves. Lost men declared to other lost men untruths about the god they wish for, not the God who is.

During the singing of the old song We Are the World, those who watched saw religious symbols from all faiths spinning across a video screen, blurring, blending their lies to the already blind.

Together as One

All faiths are the same, don’t you know? Why dwell on such petty distinctions? God is whoever you want him (or her or it) to be. We are the world. We are god.

What surprised me more than anything was the genuine grief, the genuine mourning, of those who attended the memorial service. Of course his brothers and sister and daughter were distraught, but so too were many of the fans who so loved him. On the radio I heard an interview with a woman from Toronto who attended a screening of the service. She told how when she heard of Jackson’s death she collapsed and was inconsolable, at least until she could go to a tattoo parlor and have “Gone too soon” tattooed onto her body; that was the beginning of the healing process. She had brought her young son to the memorial service so he could see his mother’s love for this man she so venerated. All across North America, all across the world, there are similar stories of worship. Can we call it anything other than worship? I don’t think this is too strong a word. For many people, Jackson was a god; for many people celebrity is idolatry.

Yesterday we saw idolatry of a whole different order yet idolatry that is so similar to what I saw in The Story of India. There are some who, in their idolatry, bow low before gods of wood and stone and burnished bronze. There are others who, in their idolatry, live vicariously through celebrities and who bow low before the spirit of the age. Michael Jackson’s funeral, where God’s name was invoked and where Jesus’ name was supposedly held high, was as vivid an expression of idolatry as was the footage of hordes of Indian Hindus dancing with joy and veneration before their statues. One is a base idolatry, the other is sophisticated and proper. Both are the same ancient sin, the same ancient rebellion against the one true God.

Comments (48) »


1. J.P.H.
July 8, 2009
10:28 AM

“Somehow it seems that this form of idolatry should have been left in the past; have we not evolved or developed or matured beyond bowing before gods of wood and bronze?”

For what it’s worth, this is exactly what many unbelievers say regarding Christian practice. Just substitute “invisible make-believe gods” for “gods of wood and bronze”.

Perhaps also worth noting that the “god” being worshiped is not the physical idol. From what I gather the idol is just a physical representation of a god who is otherwise ethereal, and it’s that ethereal god that’s being worshiped.


2. Leslie Glie
July 8, 2009
10:38 AM

I have always found the celebrity worship of our culture deeply disturbing, but this tops it all. I did not watch the service but heard alllll about it from my co-workers. Lots of MJ jokes going around, other people talking about how great he was, others speculating about all the child molestation charges, etc. The problem is that I’ve heard this for the better part of the last two weeks!!

Whenever a big celebrity dies, pop culture goes nuts. Suddenly everyone had a special “bond” with the person, others say he was a HUGE influence in their life (evident by their one CD purchase if that much), still others, like the silly tattoo woman, behaving histerically, turning the tragedy of someone they never even meant into their own, personalizing it and glorifying it so that suddenly something in life is important enough to grieve.

I knew of the solid gold casket, and although surely it was lovely, what good will it do 6 feet under? But I didn’t know of the ecumenical and pluralistic worship service until the article, but certainly do not find it surprising. Whenever someone dies, we hear theology that would cause a rooster to scratch his head. Of course, everyone that dies goes to heaven, or to a better place, or they finally found aaallll the happiness they never found in real life, etc. etc. etc.

What shocks me is that when a big celebrity dies, we don’t hear much of, “Oh, that could be me at any time. Death meets all of us, rich, poor, black, white, famous, quiet….wonder what really happens afterward?” Instead of asking deep serious questions, perhaps even considering eternality and consequences of this life, of getting right with God…they poo poo it all to “a better place” knowing nothing of whether it is true or not.

Anyway…I’m starting to go on a tangent here…yes, this is idolatry without question and pluralism glorified in a way that seems almost more banal than the blatant idol worship of the Indian pagans.


3. Lori
July 8, 2009
10:47 AM

Your thoughts were well articulated and very keen, Tim.

I’m struck by the blatant mockery of the Truth embodied by the mantra “Together as One.” It is man’s twisted desire to unite all people into one collective body of believers (in imitation of the Church) for the purpose of worshipping a plurality of co-equal beings (a perversion of our Triune God). Here, we see pride in its full glory, with man exalting himself over God—where, instead of being made in God’s image, God is made in man’s image.

It’s a classic example of how Satan perverts the Truth, and it is truly sad to see so many people deceived by such a wicked lie. Like you, I am filled with humble gratitude because I know that, but for the grace of God, I would be singing that mantra myself.


4. Stephen
July 8, 2009
11:08 AM

Golden calf, golden casket…


5. Don Smith
July 8, 2009
11:15 AM

Thanks for expressing very well many of the thoughts I had as I too watched with morbid curiosity. Your’s is an excellent report on the idolatry of celebrity and plurality of idolatry!


6. Tom
July 8, 2009
11:17 AM

I found it interesting that one of the songs sung during the ceremony was the gospel song “Soon and Very Soon” by Andrae Crouch.

When they sung the lyrics, “Hallelujah! Hallelujah! We’re going to see the King,” the “King” they were referencing was Michael Jackson.

Sad.


7. Kevin Mullins
July 8, 2009
11:43 AM

I didn’t watch the service yesterday but my co-workers were over my shoulder so I had to watch it by proxy, unfortunately. Much of the “ecumenical” overtones reminded me of the “Coexist” bumper-stickers I see out here in California. There seems to be a vein of elitism running rampant in the liberal mindset out here suggesting that we Christians simply need to learn to co-exist with others peacefully without forcing our beliefs on other people. Ironically, that is the very thing the “Coexist” sticker doesn’t even do itself.

The adulation and tribute paid to that mortal was disturbing but not unexpected. The very people that mocked him, made fun of his brokenness, made snide jokes about his appearance, and questioned his relationships with teenage boys, were falling over themselves to outdo their neighbor in the depth of their grief. Instead of a time of self-reflection and repentance, the hood of deceit was pulled down tighter. What a shame…


8. Allen
July 8, 2009
11:54 AM

Tom’s observation (# 6) made me wince. Didn’t watch it. And Kevin Mullins, I see those “COEXIST” stickers all over town here in Tallahassee, FL (then again, it is a city with three public colleges…)


9. Leslie G
July 8, 2009
12:11 PM

Kevin,

Agreed that the moral ellitists use this pluralism as sort of a bully pulpit toward biblical Christians. We are now labeled as hateful simply because of our beliefs, while all those that are so evolved and advanced and, most of all, morally superior have managed to embrace everyone as one. It is heartbreaking sometimes knowing that we pray for others, show them love, try to help meet their needs, but are pinned as hateful because we reject certain lifestyles. We do not hate people for who they are, we hate what people do (including our own sin).


10. Timothy P
July 8, 2009
12:20 PM

As Lisa Anderson of Focus on the Family puts it, we do not know where Michael stood spiritually at the point of his death, but God knows. And God will be the Righteous Judge. The king of pop will be called to give an account to the King of kings (read more in my post).

I too noticed the use of God’s name, particularly Stevie Wonder who said, I believe that God is good. God is good, but God is also just. And none of us can pass judgment or be the one to say whether or not Michael is in heaven or not, but only our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

The symbols flashed during the rendition of “We are the world” continues to perpetuate the post-modern and pluralistic mindsets and pervasiveness of today. The message, the gospel we hold out today is scorned and frowned upon, but Jesus is and will forever be the Way, the Truth and the Life. All of us will one day give an account for our lives in front of God Almighty. May we, by God’s grace, by Christ’s blood, be found righteous because of all that Christ has accomplished on the cross.


11. Cathy
July 8, 2009
12:52 PM

So glad I didn’t watch; sounds like I didn’t miss much. I can’t believe the corpse of MJ is lying in a golden coffin while children are going hungry… What a monumental waste!


12. Michael A
July 8, 2009
1:30 PM

We are, after all, made for worship. We will worship…something or someone. It’s not something that time will change. It hasn’t changed since the Garden.


13. Renee
July 8, 2009
3:05 PM

Agreed Timothy…and thanks for stating it. That “none of us can pass judgment or be the one to say whether or not Michael is in heaven or not, but only our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” is statement that continually bears repeating.

It’s not a deep desire I have to see my “idol”, Michael Jackson, saved. Michael was neither my idol nor my genre of artist (except for maybe two of his oldies). But I think assuming someone is in hell based on one’s own understanding is a bad assumption. Sure, one could say that we are merely to look at the fruits of a person’s life and there find strong indication as to whether or not they were saved when they died…it’s a good argument but it’s a human argument. Salvation belongs to the Lord.


14. Tony T
July 8, 2009
3:07 PM

A hundred years ago, William Borden had a similar reaction to Indian religious practice as you just did:
http://www.amazon.com/Borden-Yale-Faith-Howard-Taylor/dp/1556610149

This book has an interesting account of his thoughts.


15. Renee
July 8, 2009
3:10 PM

Tim,

Great comparisons between the old and the new - great article.


16. Victoria
July 8, 2009
3:22 PM

Thanks Tim! So well said.
I watched none of it and I am not at all sorry that I missed it; but I deeply appreciate your analysis and comparisons.


17. Tim Challies
July 8, 2009
4:24 PM

When they sung the lyrics, “Hallelujah! Hallelujah! We’re going to see the King,” the “King” they were referencing was Michael Jackson.

Tom - I noticed that and was wondering whether there was an intentional double entendre there. I suspect there was. That “king” can refer to two people and in this case I suspect it was meant to. That is appalling, blasphemous and so much else.


18. Tim Irvin
July 8, 2009
4:59 PM

I read somewhere that the term “celebrity” was used for traveling evangelists, such as Billy Sunday, before there was a Hollywood.

I thought that was an interesting etymology and was wondering if any others had read this. I would like to see the source, if you know.


19. Chadd Sheffield
July 8, 2009
5:00 PM

Hey, interesting post. My College Minister and I were talking about idolatry today—especially in the southern churches on the 4th. And we found that it was very interesting that when Israel made the Golden Calf, they use the terms “Elohiym”(32:1) and “LORDm(32:4).”

It is interesting that they only make one calf—not many as implied by the term Elohiym. They thought they were worshiping God. So in other words, the rampant idolatry that uses the names of the Living God is lamentably common. =(


20. Happy Calvinist
July 8, 2009
8:19 PM

Very nice analysis, Tim.

Brad


21. Liz
July 8, 2009
9:16 PM

I would use the term “admiration” rather than “worship,” at least for most “fans.” People admire a celebrity’s talents and are upset that someone with those talents has died, but they didn’t “worship” that celebrity. (I’d use the term “worship” to describe how many, many people react to sports — giving sports top priority in their lives, spending huge amounts of resources such as time as well as money on them, wearing or displaying sports logos so everyone knows their object of worship, etc.)


22. David Snoke
July 8, 2009
11:43 PM


23. Timothy Smith
July 9, 2009
5:39 AM

Just to clarify, few Indians/Hindus would identify the piece of rock, wood, metal that they worship as the sole divinity or force of the Universe. Most DO believe in a transcendant or ultimate reality that supercedes or invests life in all things (yes, including a man-made idol). Most Hindus we know (we live in North India) have a far more “spiritual” worldview than most North Americans, in that they see the idols/deities that they worship, and the Ultimate reality of Divinity, in everything and everyone. They subscribe to a far more nuanced and complicated concept of “god” than many in the world.

Don’t misunderstand me: Indians/Hindus are aggressively pluralistic and have difficulty seeing much distinction between gods/goddesses and Christ Jesus. But they are not any more ignorant, stupid or wicked than the great majority of Westerners who don’t physically bow before their gods. We are still shocked when we see our Hindu friends worshipping their gods/goddesses, but we are even more shocked by the brazen, godless lives of many purported evangelical “believers.” Why does it take something like “Michael Jackson” for North American believers to become fed up with their own idols?

Tim Keller, in his message at Gospel Coalition, said something like, (paraphrasing), “Physical idolatry presumes or takes for granted heart-idolatry and spiritual idolatry.” The difference between Hindu idolatry and North American idolatry is that the North American bows down mentally, emotionally and spiritually; the Hindu does the same thing—just on his knees. One other thing: most Hindus are polytheists in the customary western classical sense. They are often panentheists (meaning ‘Everything is in God’) or henotheists (meaning, “Devotion to One god/goddess without denying others).

Ultimately, the best way to share the good news with a Hindu friend is to invite them into your life/home often. Let them see the glorious power of Christ displayed in you and your family. Talk about Jesus… what Jesus said, what Jesus did, and what Jesus is going to do. Let them into your lives and share the stories of our Lord! You needn’t comment on their little gods and goddesses—Christ Jesus Himself will take care of them.


24. Trudy
July 9, 2009
6:33 AM

It is clear that we have a hurting family here. Is anyone on this board praying for the Jackson family and the children? Is anyone able to make contact with this family to express their condolences and share the Gospel of Jesus Christ? The Lord often uses crisis to bring people to Himself.

The hour is late. Didn’t Jesus say, “The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest?” (Luke 10:2)

Let’s be about our Father’s business!



25. Crystal
July 9, 2009
10:11 AM

I agree with Tim & Renee. Salvation belongs to the Lord. I hate how many Christians I’ve heard lately saying Michael is now burning in hell…he’s not king anymore, etc. They say we never saw fruit, but come on! Did the thief on the cross show ANY visible fruit to the people he knew?? I’m certain his victims assumed he’s burning in hell too, yet, Jesus promised he’d be in paradise with Him. We need to stop passing judgment on the salvation of the dead. Instead, focus on helping the living find and work theirs out while there’s still time.


26. J.P.H.
July 9, 2009
10:45 AM

Geraldo Rivera had this to say about the memorial:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=43170&tsp=1


27. Lori
July 9, 2009
10:55 AM

Timothy Smith said, “Why does it take something like “Michael Jackson” for North American believers to become fed up with their own idols?”

I think that, by and large, we have been unbiblically tolerant of and silent about the rampant idolatry (and other sin) in American culture. We have become less concerned with what God thinks and more concerned with what we think. We have allowed ourselves to be informed by the culture, rather than defining it, much to our shame and God’s displeasure.

But some of us have been waking up from our slumber; and, for those of us who are still a bit groggy, God has been pleased to rouse us. He reminds us, through the current economic recession, that we cannot place our trust in our financial investments. He reminds us, through the cult of personality surrounding our recently elected political leader, that we cannot place our faith in a man. He reminds us, by the death of Michael Jackson, that talent, fame, and fortune do not satisfy or impart wisdom, and that being adored by, perhaps, millions, cannot make you feel truly loved. God alone is worthy and able.

God is jealous for our affection, and the above behaviors anger Him. He is faithful to His word and warns us of the consequences of such actions. But He shows us His love by chastening us, and He is opening our eyes and calling us to repent. May we love the Lord our God with ALL our heart, mind, soul and strength.


28. Phil
July 9, 2009
4:25 PM

J.P.H. wrote:
“For what it’s worth, this is exactly what many unbelievers say regarding Christian practice. Just substitute “invisible make-believe gods” for “gods of wood and bronze”.

There are huge difference between the idolatrous statues mentioned and the God of the Bible. There are powerful evidential arguments rooted in history, philosophy and science that make God’s existence eminently reasonable, not “make-believe.” Statues of wood and bronze have nothing comparable to the Cosmological, the Telelogical, Moral, and Christological arguments for the existence of God. Additionally, the God of the Bible has acted in history. Statues cannot move even a centimeter by themselves. Atheists betray their own ignorance and/or hardness of heart when they compare the Lord God to statues and idols.


29. Julius mickel
July 9, 2009
4:31 PM

TIm excellent job, i was yearning for a really good post on the MJ situation and this one hits the nail on the head, I probably wouldn’t have posted my own thoughts if I had read this first. Bless you bro

I do believe the SHOCK came from ‘worshippers’ who couldn’t imagine their ‘American Dream’ representative to suddenly lose everything. We could plaster such messages as: A WASTED LIFE, WHAT PROFIT IS IT TO GAIN THE WHOLE WORLD AND LOSE YOUR SOUL?, STORE UP TREASURES IN HEAVEN.., FOOL TONIGHT YOUR SOUL WILL BE REQUIRED OF YOU AND WHO’S WILL BE WHAT YOU HAVE STORED UP, or IT IS APPOINTED UNTO MEN TO DIE ONCE AND THEN JUDGMENT.
May the church consider PS 73 in light of this, and NEVER envy the wicked for their end will come ‘suddenly’.
BTW the ‘thief’ DID show fruit: from just a few words we get a man defending the righteousness of Christ, rebuking the mockery of the wicked, an incredibly convicting state of mind that is so crushed he only asks to be remembered. ‘You WILL know them by their fruit’.
One of the Puritans said (maybe WATSON) that for the wicked THIS life is the closest they’ll get to heaven, yet for the believer THIS life is the closest they will get to hell!


30. J.P.H.
July 9, 2009
6:41 PM

Phil:

I also made the point that Hindus et. al. aren’t worshipping physical idols, per se, but ethereal deities whose likenesses are captured in those idols.

If it is the case that these deities are in fact “real”, i.e. fallen angels, which many people suggest, then those who “believe in” them aren’t being unreasonable in doing so. I mean, we can say they’re blind to the evil behind those deities, but we can’t really fault someone for believing they “exist”.


31. Renee
July 9, 2009
10:49 PM

Julius said:

BTW the ‘thief’ DID show fruit: from just a few words we get a man defending the righteousness of Christ, rebuking the mockery of the wicked, an incredibly convicting state of mind that is so crushed he only asks to be remembered. ‘You WILL know them by their fruit’.

Julius, we only know of the thief’s exchange of words with Jesus because of witnesses who were close enough to hear it. To onlookers in the crowd, too far back to hear anything, the thief looked just like a man receiving his just punishment for a life of crime. His expression of faith in Jesus Christ is what saved him, nothing else.

We sit in front of our computers, far enough away from where Michael was in his private room the day he passed away, imagining that Michael Jackson’s freakshow life is proof enough that he landed in hell. None of us are privy to Michael’s eternal address.


32. Hayden
July 9, 2009
11:21 PM

Renee,

Did Mr. Jackson die suddenly, or did he linger long? This deathbed confession that you have talked about in multiple threads would have been nearly impossible if he died suddenly.


33. CD-Host
July 10, 2009
8:14 AM

are pinned as hateful because we reject certain lifestyles. We do not hate people for who they are, we hate what people do (including our own sin).

Leslie —

Assume for a moment you did actually hate gays for who they were and not for their sins. What would have to change in the behavior as most of them experience it from the Christian right? Lets look over the last 30 years in terms of outreach:

1) bans on gay marriage
2) bans on gays teaching in schools
3) bans on adoption
4) pushing for enforcement of sodomy laws
5) support for housing discrimination
6) targeting their get-together places for closure (even just last year in NY)
7) using anti-gay prejudice to get obscenity convictions against their literature and book stores
8) strong protests against their right to appear in characters in television and movies “normalization”
9) strong opposition to funding when their community had specific diseases. In particular opposition to funding for education.
10) frequent workplace discrimination including support for the army ban. Sodomy is still a violation of the UCMJ while vaginal sex is not.
11) protests against companies that adopted non discrimination policies (like Disney/ABC)
12) Opposition their rights to hold public parades on an equal basis with other groups.

That looks like as systematic attack on a community not an outreach program.


34. Leslie G
July 10, 2009
10:42 AM

CD Host,

Sorry you feel that way.


35. Renee
July 10, 2009
10:46 AM

Hayden,

I guess the many responses I’ve left on the subject prove my relentless belief that we ought not judge what we are not qualified to judge. I’m not so much fixated on Michael Jackson’s private experience before he died as much as the common reaction by Christians to assume that if someone wasn’t in a “church”, if someone lived a life that did not fit our standards of “normal”, if someone had a bad reputation, then certainly we can deduce that the chances of him being saved are next to none.

Not to go off on a tangent here, but to prove a point, I’ve been shocked by the reaction people in the church have had to the book The Shack. I know of people whose longtime church pastors are giving out the book to as many who will read it, thinking that they are doing a good Christian deed. I have read of seminary professors who encourage others to read the book, as they themselves are moved by how the author depicts another beautiful side of God. From the outside, these are man who “know” their theology; men who have knelt, who have prayed, and who have implored God. From the outside, Christians may be hard-pressed to believe that these men may be just as lost as any Atheist. After all, they are Christian husbands of but one wife, they give their tithes, and they have the appearance of good.

Jesus was offensive to the religious people of His day. He attracted fishermen, prostitutes, thieves, half-breeds and He often ignored the Mosaic law. He was hardest on the religious people and gentlest on the outcasts. Christians who “appear” good will be accepted by other Christian circles – there’s a false sense of security in that. Outcasts who appear lost will have God’s mercy if their hearts are right. Salvation is a thing of the heart, a thing of private motives…and my point, however poor my attempt at stating it is that none of us can judge a man’s heart…none of us can authoritatively state, based on Michael Jackson’s weird life, that he is probably lost.

“But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice,’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.” Matthew 9:13


36. Leslie G
July 10, 2009
10:51 AM

CD Host,

Interesting you pulled the gay lifestyle in particular out of my argument, which addressed sinful lifestyles in general, not gay in specific. In fact, the word “gay” was not even used in my post, although it is a sinful lifestyle, as is hetero sexual immorality, adultery, stealing, etc. Are you a student of theology, a theologian, or a gay rights’ activist????? Why did you feel the need to post what you see as systematic attacks against gays on a blog discussing idolatry and sin in general? Were you hear to have a good discussion on the blog, or argue with the posters over gay issues?


37. Renee
July 10, 2009
11:40 AM

CD Host,

The only reason why the list you posted seems an unfair treatment of that particular group is because some Christians, like me, protest and successfully achieve bans on sinfulness that is not only an obvious aberration from God’s laws, but a minority lifestyle in a majority’s norm. Were Christians, myself included, more congruent in our convictions, we’d protest and ban fornication and adultery just as equally…but we have degrees of sin, don’t you know?

Having said that, homosexuality, like fornication, like adultery, are all sins in God’s sight. Your argument is with Him.


38. Hayden
July 10, 2009
11:41 AM

Renee,

I would not disagree with you totally, but you keep bringing up the thief on the cross and the parallel is distant at best.

Mr. Jackson lived a difficult existence and his life is much more like Ecclesiastes. That would be a much better parallel.

I take NO JOY in the condemnation of the lost but I am also reminded by Scripture that God is perfectly just, holy, loving, good, and true when the lost are condemned for their rejection of our Savior Jesus Christ. The ‘fruit’ on Mr Jackson’s tree was not one of repentance. He had many of chances to repent and believe. Maybe Hebrews 6 is just as applicable in this situation.

Just like you are leery to say one way or another where he is, the whole point is really how Jesus dealt with suffering not how we feel about Mr. Jackson. What we are to learn from this is Luke 13:1-9.

You are right on the Shack and also on the religiosity of the church, but defending the honor of Mr. Jackson is not really that important. The unbelieving world laughs at all of the groups claiming that he is ‘one of theirs’. (I saw an article linked in the news service mocking this)

Use this opportunity to preach and teach repentance, not pin your hopes on a ‘deathbed confession’ that came when Mr. Jackson was not aware that his time was near. People wills ay what they will say, but your answer should be the Gospel!


39. Renee
July 10, 2009
11:46 AM

Hayden,

Wow…you keep missing my point. I think I’m “tout fini” with this one.


40. J.P.H.
July 10, 2009
2:50 PM

Renee #37:

Why do you consider it beneficial, or to be the responsibility of believers, to work towards the criminalization of sinful behavior?


41. Leslie G
July 10, 2009
3:38 PM

In all actuality, I don’t see why people think that anyone is trying to “criminalize” behavior. The laws are designed to protect society from the spread of these agendas that wish to redefine everything according to their own choice lifestyles. These free-choice individuals are attempting to force/impose their self-interested agendas on everyone else, not the other way around. We did not say, “Hey, let’s ban gay marriage, so that gays won’t think it’s okay to get married,” or “Hey, let’s ban single heterosexuals from living together so they won’t do it.” (and these are only a couple of examples). Those who desire to live within a particular lifestyle lobby to change laws to redefine marriage to include civil unions, etc, indoctrinate kids in school to see everything as all good and great except heterosexuality or abstinence, insist upon abortion on demand, etc. all the while ensuring that everything God related is voted out. Christianity is what has been criminalized. The laws/legislation, etc. posted in #33 are to protect everyone, including the people that wish to dismantle them. It has been argued over and over again that love cannot exist without righteousness and justice, and there is no reason why Christians should pander to the emotions of others so that they may feel “loved.” That is not the right kind of love.

Real love comes this way: We are all born sinners, none of us do right, not one. We are separated from God by our sin and are as such condemned to His righteous wrath. God so loved the world that Jesus came and lived a sinless life, bore our sins on the cross, and rose again three days later. He is the Lord and Savior, He has provided the way to reconciliation with God. He bore the full wrath of God on the cross so that those who believe on Him will have eternal life. So be reconciled with God, submit yourselves to Christ’s Lordship, love each other, and obey God.

The Cross, not laws and legislature designed to alter society’s institutions (and many of them God given at that), is the only path to real love.

To borrow from Renee, I’m “tout fini” with this one. God bless you.


42. J.P.H.
July 10, 2009
4:23 PM

Leslie:

Renee’s exact words were: “some Christians, like me, protest and successfully achieve bans on sinfulness”.

It is also the case that there are some Christians who would like to see certain sins criminalized, with homosexuality being just one example. Recall that sodomy laws were on the books in many states up until the 60s or later. Texas still had one until Lawrence v. Texas. Some folks would like to see a return to these laws, and have them actually be enforced.

At various times in the United States’ history, blasphemy has been illegal. Specifically blasphemy against the Christian God.

Many people would like to see porn criminalized, not because of any damaging “practical” effects it has, but because it is inherently sinful. Ditto for organized gambling.

My personal belief is that Christians are under no obligation to work towards the criminalization of sin in general. They are, however, obligated to work towards the criminalization of certain sinful activities not on the basis of those activities being sinful, but because they cause direct harm to innocents (e.g. abortion), and protecting innocents from harm falls under the banner of “loving one’s neighbor”.

I’d maintain that strenuous, public Christian opposition to “gay marriage” has done more harm than good w/ respect to the spread of the gospel.


43. Leslie G
July 10, 2009
4:30 PM

J.P.H.

Thank you for clarifying those points.

God Bless


44. Renee
July 10, 2009
4:42 PM

J.P.H.

Back when this country was being founded, your question would have been a surprising one. Our countries’ legal codes were shaped by Judeo-Christian values and it was considered beneficial to the integrity of society to work toward the criminalization of sinful behaviour. Surprisingly enough, adultery, not just murder and theft, was a punishable crime. Nowadays, sin is an archaic term thanks to subjectivism.

But to answer your question, I’m not petitioning for the criminalization of any sin per se. My point earlier was to establish that if we as “congruent” Christians were so diligent at lobbying against same-sex rights, we would be lobbying against many other things that have now fallen under the column of “tolerable sins”.


45. Julius mickel
July 10, 2009
9:47 PM

The point is not to condemn but to speak on what God HAS spoken on. Judging in the light of fruit is commendable and commanded see Mt 7 (get the whole point of the passage)
1 John is another great book which points certain lifestyles out and then throws a repeating statement of condemnation ‘..they are liars”
What well meaning pastors do or people that pray is quite unimportant since our rule of life and doctrine is the scriptures. How many times did Paul warn believrs to Not be deceived. Paul also gave a list of people three times making clear that such people will NOT inherit the kingdom of God.
The reality of conversion is that Jesus not only saves us from the penalty of our sins, but saves us from the power of it. To say otherwise is fulfilling 2 places in scripture that come to mind, as it says in 2 Timothy 3:1-5 specifically verse 5, ‘having a form of godliness but denying it’s power…..’ and Jude 4 ‘for certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.
As concerning the thief, we have his words because the Holy Spirit saw fit to tell us. Jc Ryle said concerning death-bed conversions in light of this passage ‘One was saved that none would despair but only one so none would presume’.
Oh how we need to understand the GOSPEL, oh for Preachers who will preach it.
Check out my boi PAUL WASHER, shocking youth message and many more (youtube)


46. Hayden
July 10, 2009
11:37 PM

Renee,

Sorry that I am being dense. Maybe a conversation like this one would be best had with your pastor and not one on the internet :—) I pray that the Lord would use such a conversation to grow you in your walk, just as He does for all of us when we discuss the world around us and view them through the prism of the Word.

Many blessings!


47. Renee
July 11, 2009
11:18 AM

Hayden,

I don’t understand the logic that your misunderstanding of my point constitutes a need for me to seek a conversation with my local pastor. I will accept your wish for me to grow in my walk with the Lord though. That’s a generous wish.


48. Hayden
July 11, 2009
6:42 PM

Renee,

That was in no way meant to be a rebuke. I was just encouraging you to open a dialogue with your Pastor, or some godly women, on this topic. It seems that you are really passionate about it, and maybe you need to talk with others face to face.

It was not meant to be adversarial, but loving. I meant no offense at all.

Blogs can be impersonal.

I really do not think we are too far apart on this topic.