Since this article concerns what progressive means, why not look at the dictionary? According to The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, the word progressive means: “1. Moving forward; ongoing; advancing. 2. Proceeding in steps; continuing steadily by increments.”
Progressive brings to mind regressive, which, as one would expect, means to go back to where we once were. But then there is digressive, which is also an important word. To digress is: “To stray from the main subject in writing or speaking; turn aside.” So, what is the point of bringing to mind the definitions of these words? Progressive and digressive are supposed to be two different concepts, but now they appear to be the same.
The same dictionary cited for all the definitions above contains one more piece of pertinent information. Under progressive, the third definition is: “promoting or favoring political reform; liberal.” In “Christendom” in general, and in the Lord’s church in particular, progressives have become liberals who digress (turn aside) from the Word of God.
For example, when ignoring what the Bible teaches about the role of women in the church (1 Tim. 2:11-14; 1 Cor. 14:34), certain leaders style themselves as progressive when actually they are digressive because they clearly turn aside from what is written. God gave certain boundaries to His children to stay within; whoever goes beyond those does not abide in the doctrine of Christ, and they have not God (2 John 9-11). After God gave the Ten Commandments to Israel, and His people conquered the land, one wonders how long it took after Joshua’s death before a “progressive” arose to encourage the making of graven images. Apparently, the Hebrew language has no word for either progress or progressive. Whatever they called themselves, they “progressed” quite rapidly into a nation of idolaters. Oh, wait, there had already been idolaters in the land. They must have been regressives in actuality. One thing is certain: they “turned aside” from the Word of God.
What were those men called who led the entire world into building the Tower of Babel? One can imagine that they were called progressive, innovative, forward thinking, enlightened—anything but commandment breakers. God had said to: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth” (Gen. 9:1), but they said, “No, we would rather remain in one place.” Since these digressive leaders refused to obey, God Himself “scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth” (Gen. 11:9).
Of course, there is such a thing as genuine progress, but it does not involve violating the Scriptures or returning to various facets of paganism.
“The Spiritual and Moral Bankruptcy Of ‘Progressive’ Christianity”
What brings all of these introductory comments to mind is a December 18, 2018 on-line article by Michael Brown for stream.org. On the first page he points out one of the characteristics of progressives that is not in the dictionary: They like to bash conservative Christians. [To this writer, conservative and Christian is a redundancy. All Christians should stand by what the Scriptures teach, but the reader knows what he means.] They engage in the logical fallacy called the
ad hominem attack, which literally means “against the man.” What this means is, when people have little or no argument to support their position, they call their opponents names. In this case, Christians are referred to as dinosaurs and outdated fundamentalists.
Over a period of time, Brown had reached out to a particular spiritual leader without any kind of response. After presenting a message in which he set forth what the Bible teaches about homosexuality, the progressive in question sent out a tweet in which he described Brown and those like him as “hopelessly phobic people of faith.” Brown said that instead of calling names, they ought to have a serious discussion of the issue. No response. Apparently, progressives don’t want a level playing field where both sides are able to speak. The enlightened one posted these thoughts.
Michael thinks LGBTQ people can NOT be LGBTQ. Michael thinks you can pray the gay away. Michael preys upon already marginalized people. Michael thinks other people’s bedrooms and body parts are his business. Don’t be like Michael.
So, what does the reader glean from this paragraph? No quotes from Michael are cited. The “pastor” who posted it just presumes to know what Michael Brown is thinking, although he said or wrote none of those statements. Furthermore, Brown’s critic has judged him to be guilty of these crimes without even a trial. Progressive souls obviously know what other people are thinking—even though they refuse to have a conversation or correspondence with them. Nobody can get any more superior than that.
The second thing to note is that the posting “pastor” provided no Scriptures for his position. Not one. When you’re a progressive, you can make up your own rules. Michael Brown responded to the tweet.
John, by God’s grace, I know MANY ex-gays and lesbians who are so thankful for new life in Jesus. And I continue to have fruitful ministry around the world, NOT focused on LGBT issues. I have simply responded to biblical deception and radical activism. You have accommodated sin.
The purpose, of course, was to convey that dealing with homosexuality was not a hobby, but in the course of Brown’s ministry the subject does come up. It is difficult to ignore in today’s world. A person cannot turn on the television any more without some expression of approval for homosexuality and derogatory remarks about anyone who would dare oppose it. Alluding to those who had ceased practicing homosexuality, John replied:
No, you don’t. You know people who you and others have badgered into modifying their behavior to stay in community. You’ve squandered your time here and you’ve caused irreparable harm to already marginalized people. That’s on you.
Now here is an attribute of progressives that some may not have expected, but, in addition to all their other wonderful attributes, they are omniscient. Without having met even one of the ex-gays that Michael Brown referenced who are joyous in their decision to leave their former practices, “Pastor” John knows that not one of them is happy. Wouldn’t one have to be Divine to know that? Is John making a claim to be Deity? So it would seem. He can confidently state that
not even one person has ever given up the practice and been happy about it.
Has he never read 1 Corinthians 6:9-11? Paul said some had quit the practice of homosexuality. Would John have the temerity to tell Paul that he was wrong? That’s the trouble with progressives; they progress beyond what the Scriptures teach. Consistency would demand that John call Paul wrong or mistaken, thus calling into question the inspiration of the Scriptures. If Paul was wrong on this subject, what else is he wrong about—women not having leadership roles? In actuality, John’s position is one of digression. He has turned aside from what the Scriptures teach.
A second of John’s transgressions is that he misrepresented the position of Michael Brown, putting words in his mouth that he never spoke, such as praying the gay away. It seems like someone else uses such tactics. Now, who could it be—Satan? That’s right, the devil enjoys slandering people.
It may well be that John knows a few people who tried to change but could not. Some may have even faked being “straight.” But these personal anecdotes do not mean that everyone falls into that category. Many people have tried to quit smoking but never did. Does that mean that no one has ever quit? Some alcoholics have tried to quit drinking, but they failed. In some instances, they fooled others into believing they had been cured. The same thing could be said of drug addicts—or adulterers. Some are clever enough to continue their lascivious practices—and “get away” with it (from a human perspective). A person devoted to drinking, after failing to quit, may say, “I’m just trying to fool myself into thinking I’m quitting.” A homosexual may likewise believe he cannot be anything else.
We all can change—if we truly have a commitment to God and changing ourselves. It’s called repentance, and it takes patience and willpower to accomplish. Paul wrote to those who had changed their ways—in one of the most carnally corrupt cities of the world.
Concerning the earlier comment that Christians think other people’s bedrooms and body parts are our business; this is about as slanted as it gets. Did we write the Scriptures? Did we originate morality? God is the one who explained morality to us. Was the writer of Hebrews snooping about people’s bedrooms when he said that fornicators and adulterers God would judge (Heb. 13:4)? Is Paul to be blamed for writing about what it means to be joined to a harlot (1 Cor. 6:15-20)? The problem with progressives is that they don’t like to observe what the Scriptures teach.
Justification
Brown points out that progressives “celebrate their departure from the ‘traditional church.’” It becomes clear, however, that it is the Scriptures they are departing from. Brown heard from a professing homosexual “Christian” how excited he was about his forthcoming wedding with his partner. He even had a Scripture to use for the occasion (he does not say what it was). Brown presented to him Scriptures that condemn same-sex relationships. His response was that “the Bible was not his final authority and that God was bigger than a book.”
Obviously, God is bigger than a book, but He chose to reveal Himself, including His nature and character, within the pages of The Book. He discussed both holiness and corruption; homosexuality belongs in the latter category. Is the man implying that God has changed His mind on the subject since the Bible was authored? Or is he insinuating that God did not record everything in the Bible? If such were the case, then there would not be one truth that is safe—neither with respect to morality nor salvation. God simply changed His mind or did not record everything. The problem is that the Bible says that He gave us all things that pertain to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3). No emendations have ever been
necessary.
The truth is that the Bible is not his final authority. He himself is his final authority—just as in the days of the judges (21:25). So, how do “progressives” justify their behavior? They do not. One woman told Michael Brown that he “was obviously not a scholar.” This is an example of, “The best defense is a good offense.” Don’t deal with the issue. Just accuse your opponent of not being qualified. The tactic did not work. He asked her for verses of Scriptures to back up her viewpoint; she offered none. That’s progressivism.
As news commentator Paul Harvey used to say, All that’s called progress—isn’t. Combining modern technology with ancient truths is progress. Departing from the message of the Scriptures is digression. Do we really want to turn aside from the truth?