Okay; it has been 15 years since part one of this series. They have continued to publish interviews and news stories about liberal churches and schools, but the July issue caught the attention of several people, mainly due to three articles in it—one of which was an interview with a “one cup” group. But let’s begin with the “opinion” piece— “Restroom Debate Requires Loving, Kingdom Answers to Questions of Gender Identity” (28). The title is enough to turn the reader’s stomach.
The “kingdom” answer is for each individual to accept the way God made him. Only those born hermaphrodites have a legitimate problem. One knows that the ride is going to be bumpy when he reads that the kingdom perspective is, “Everyone sins.” Of course the statement is true, but it is irrelevant. No one is allowed to entertain sin or practice sin. Jesus called sin sin, but we are living in an age where some try to excuse everyone instead of holding them accountable.
Adultery, for example, is sin. Should an adulterer be forgiven? Yes, but not if he continues to practice it. Jesus told the woman taken in adultery to go and sin no more. He did not tell her, “Aw, shucks, we all sin.”
And while we should not “mock, belittle, or marginalize another human because of their sin or temptation,” neither are we to support them in their error.
Is it the case that no group should receive “worse sinners” status? Really? Does that hold true for child molesters and mass murderers? Why does the author of this article think that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed—because the inhabitants cheated at cards? Did God Himself not assign them “worse sinners” status? While all sin—even private sin—is an affront to God, how can it not be seen that the results of some sins are far worse than others? Homosexuality left unchecked in the cities of the plain caused the sin to spread even further.
When Herod killed all of the children two years old and under, he committed an atrocious act. Most people would say that it is worse than coveting an extra piece of pie or cake. Will God destroy a nation for allowing 60 million abortions, which approves of Planned Parenthood selling body parts of infants? Perhaps we should be blasé and conclude that everyone sins and there is no group that has “worse sinners” status.
The statements become more outrageous as the article continues. “Identity confusion is common.” Says who? If it is (which seems unlikely based on the past experience of most of us), it has only recently become so and probably due to those who are intentionally trying to confuse others. Who has heard anyone wonder if he should be male or female on a given day?
The writer goes on to say that we all “fall prey to the lies of the enemy that convince us we are not enough, that we need to be something more or different than we are.” The Bible says that Eve fell for Satan’s lie that God was keeping something from mankind—something we deserved to have, but nothing indicates she was experiencing feelings of inadequacy. The devil did not attempt to get her to change genders. We do not hear her muttering, “I want to be more like Adam.”
The writer then ties gender ”confusion” to God not knowing what He is doing and a legitimate principle of the need of self-improvement. He says: “How God made me is not sufficient, and I need to change myself so I will be better than I am.” Then he cites eating the forbidden fruit as an example. This analogy fails because the first couple was not trying to better themselves; they were trying to have more than what God desired for them. There’s a reason the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes are termed covetousness. The desire is for something that one should not have or for what is not even available. Certainly, we should improve on the skills that God has given us, but Satan promises what is not even realistic.
The author rightly observes that the way we treat someone personally is not the same way we deal with issues publicly. But he way oversteps the truth when he avers: “Judgement [sic], condemnation, harshness and disgust do not reflect Jesus.” Has he never read
Matthew 23 and all of the times Jesus said, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites”? His personal conversation with Nicodemus was totally different.
But Jesus never said, “Don’t judge, period.” Rather He said, “Judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). Who condemned sin more than Jesus did? “And this is the condemnation, that light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil” (John 3:19). As for harshness, some would say that Matthew 7:13-14 is way too harsh. Concerning the word disgust, perhaps the author should read Leviticus 20:13: “If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.” The word abomination means “an abhorrence for someone or something.” That just might include the concept of disgust.
The public has been talked into thinking that homosexuality is just an alternative “lifestyle.” No, it still disgusts God; it is an abomination. Now those claiming to be Christians are falling for the propaganda of the homosexual agenda. We do not hate individuals, but the sin is disgusting. The writer is correct in saying that the issue is not about restrooms; it is not—it is about advancing the homosexual agenda.
Many misapply compassion. It should not be granted to those who have no intention of changing. Jesus was willing to grant forgiveness to Zacchaeus for his genuine repentance of stealing from others and the willingness to restore fourfold. Did he not have compassion on others? Yes, but He expressed it in the form of warning. He told Judas it would be better that he had not been born (Matt. 26:24). To tell people steeped in sin, “Unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish,” is the demonstration of compassion. To say that we are all sinners helps them not at all.
The writer of this unfortunate article claims that “this issue is not new, and it involves people in the pews of more churches than most might think.” Preposterous! Of all the problems that brethren and churches have had in the past 50 years, this notion has not once surfaced—until now. “Historically, Christians struggling with gender dysphoria did so in silence due to fear.” Where is the evidence for all this confusion? Where is the Scriptural evidence for it?
The writer says we need to view gender identity problems from a “kingdom perspective.” Okay. Here it is. If you want to be valuable in the kingdom, quit being self-absorbed and introspective to the point where you think you are the most important individual in the universe and that God made a mistake in assigning your gender. You are what you are; now make the best use of it to mature spiritually and teach others.
The second article under consideration from the July issue of The Christian Chronicle reviews a speech given at the so-called Christian’s Scholar Conference, hosted by David Lipscomb University in June of this year. This activity travels to various schools around the country. The conference has had a reputation for being a showcase of liberalism for decades since its inception at Pepperdine in 1981. The speaker who claimed that the need for Christian universities is greater than ever is a graduate of Lubbock Christian University and Abilene Christian University—two places that faithful brethren would warn young people to stay away from. He was a former professor at Pepperdine and has been the head of Southern Methodist University since 1995 (3).
One might ask, “What is one of ‘our guys’ doing as the head of a Methodist School?” Could it be that “our guy” is so compromised that nobody cares? It may also be that SMU is no longer concerned about its original beliefs all that much. One thing is certain: Most of the universities established by brethren and associated with the churches of Christ no longer stand with the religious convictions of those who founded them. Most have departed from those principles. The only school somewhat trustworthy at the current time is Freed-Hardeman, but if it joined Lipscomb, Lubbock, Pepperdine, Abilene, OCU, and others next week, few would be greatly surprised. How sad that institutions founded to do so much good have resulted in so much damage!
Ideally, a Christian College sounds like a wonderful idea, and for decades after their origin, many of them were. Young Christian men and women met their mates at these institutions, and strong Christian families were formed. But things have changed. In order to get the doctoral degrees needed now to teach in Christian universities, a teacher must get degrees from secular universities which have no respect for the Bible. Not many can reject the peer pressure and the desire to fit in with the kind of thinking in these institutions. Undergraduates can resist with a strong support base from the local congregation, but with advanced degrees it is different. Students in a particular discipline are more likely to know and interact with each other, and one needs great resolve in order to stand alone.
One example will suffice. Brother Thomas B. Warren encouraged brethren to obtain advanced degrees in order to fight against atheism. Rubel Shelly took up the challenge, but if he has battled any atheists, it must be a well-kept secret. What happened while he was getting his Ph.D. at Vanderbilt is anyone’s guess, but he has never been the same since. Prior to his attending school there, he published Liberalism’s Threat to the Faith, which is a solid, right-on-the-money book. He has become, however, the very person (a liberal) that he wrote so eloquently against in the 1970s.
He agrees with very little of what he was taught and what he believed in during his younger years, including important subjects such as salvation, correct worship, various doctrines, and fellowship. He became President of Rochester College (formerly Michigan Christian College) in 2009, where he undoubtedly influenced young people to follow in the pathways of liberalism and compromise. The reader can just imagine what his latest book is about, published in 2011: I Knew Jesus Before He Was a Christian and I liked Him Better Then. This is the higher Christian education that The Christian Chronicle hopes to preserve?
The thesis of the article is that “Christian beliefs are under assault.” Yes, we quite agree—they are under assault by liberal professors. What is the point of saving students from atheism and then turning them over to teachers who present a false gospel to them? While it is true that atheism still needs to be opposed with all our might, do we have no responsibility to warn young people against false prophets who appear in sheep’s clothing (Matt. 7:15)?
The speaker talks about young people being trained to make a difference in the kingdom of God. Why cannot the local congregation do that? No Christian universities existed in the first century. Christianity grew and prospered because brethren had been converted and convicted by the truth (Acts 8:3-4). Having a Ph.D. is not required in order to be evangelistic. Possessing truth and a love for souls is sufficient. Most young people are either saved or lost depending on what the home and the church do. Some of the most effective Christians are “home-grown” (as with Paul and Timothy).
Brethren should pray for wisdom in this regard.