Something out of the "Iceberg" Sermon

I was listening to the Denver Biennial Address of the General Secretary again, I call it the “Iceberg” sermon ( i.e. The Titanic hit the iceberg, ABCUSA hit the biennial address), and one of the announced characteristics of radical Christian discipleship jumped out at me. Here it is, a radical Christian, according to the message, is one who has “a non-conforming engagement with the world.”

On the symptomatic issue that is wreaking havoc on and in ABCUSA it seems apparent that the denomination’s engagement with the culture does not match up.

Whether we like it or not, the scriptures do say homosexual behavior is not God’s plan for humanity. It is so not God’s plan that very emphatic and spiritually unflattering words for such behavior were inspired by the Holy Spirit. Essentially regarding this behavior, a biblically informed lifestyle can be summed up simply as “Don’t do this.”

On the other hand, the world says “It’s O.K. It’s just a different lifestyle. You don’t have to be restrained in your living by an old religious book, scripture or not. Do it, and/or approve it, if you like.”
What would a non-conforming engagement with the world on this subject look like? Would it resemble ABCUSA’s acceptance of the Welcoming & Affirming movement, or a welcoming & tranforming approach?

Rehashing orthodoxy & tolerance

I've been reading G.K. Chesterton on vacation. Ask Phil Yancy, one of our Denver Biennial speakers, what that does to a Christian thinker.

In any case, orthodox (biblical) Christianity allows for many divergent view points. The American countryside makes that clear. Drive through a small town on Maryland's eastern shore, as my wife and I did between crab cakes, and you will see it clearly. On one corner is the Methodist Church, on another the Baptists, the Presbyterians and Episcopalians, among others. All these churches, at least in their formative days, believing something that made them into Baptists, Methodists, or what have you.

They did not burn each others churches, or battle in the streets over doctrinal differences. They lived and worked together for the good of their community. The Presbyterians might have been trusted to run the bank, the Methodists the mill, the Baptists the grocery store. They cooperated and did business with one another, and were good friends all the while believing that if you did not believe in baptism by immersion or the premillennial rapture of the church you should not be a Baptist, but join a church with which you agreed. They all believed that there were standards of belief for church membership (that's why they had different churches), and if one did not subscribe to the standards of a particular church they should not be in the church to which they did not subscribe.

Baptists were tolerant of the views of others, but did not want you to become a Baptist if you did not believe what Baptists believed. If you were willing to believe that Episcopal stuff you should be Episcopalian, etc. etc. etc. and "God luv ya." The Baptists will love you, work with you, play in the same games, enjoy your friendship, and cooperate in making the world a better place with you, but don't pretend to be a Baptist when you don't believe their biblical positions.

The same sort of thing should be happening today. If the Church of Non-biblical Posturing, or Christians Without Faith, or Sophia's Sophisticates should organize and become religious bodies, Baptists can and will be tolerant despite our great disagreement with them. Baptist can and will live in community harmony and seek the good of the world amongst them, but will simply ask them to be honest about their beliefs. Don't call yourself Baptists, American or otherwise, when your beliefs are diametrically opposed to those that Baptists have historically held. To be a Baptist requires a set of fairly regimented beliefs (biblical, of course).

One is free to worship as he/she chooses, but please have the integrity not to claim the name when you reject the game. This is what the ABC's General Secretary should have been saying since the first moment after his installation. It's probably an opportunity long gone.