Blog

3 Dec, 2023

Blog

We Object, Your Honor 2/2

As I said in the previous blog, I’m not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but I thought it would be enlightening to pretend that we are in an actual court of law. If the author of this anonymous note had to defend himself it might not have gone as he had planned. So, we are going to continue our examination of the claims he made in secret to see if they can withstand the test of scrutiny.

In order for the author to demonstrate his case against the progressive church he/she must 1) demonstrate that the progressive congregation has a belief or practice that is contrary to orthodox christianity and 2) he must provide the chapter and verse that unequivocally applies to their heresy. A failure to do either one or both of these is a failure to prove his point.

In the previous blog the court decided that his first two claims did not meet the requirements of proof and were dismissed by the judge.

On God and Law – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word as god.” John 1:1

On relationships – “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Leviticus 18:22

Let’s continue!

Judge: This court is back in session, Bailiff, please read the next accusation. (Bailiff reads…)

On government – Romans 13:4-5 “for the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.”

Defense Attorney: To understand the original meaning of this verse we need to examine why Paul felt the need to instruct the church in Rome obey Roman law. We submit as supporting evidence, the writings of New Testament Scholar Dr. Bard Ehrman. According to Dr. Ehrman, as christianity began to expand to parts of the Roman Empire, “many pagans viewed Christians as politically dangerous, socially disruptive, and flagrantly immoral. Christians had to defend themselves against these charges by showing they were obedient members of the state, socially coherent and conservative, and the most moral beings on the planet.”

These verses from Romans 13 are a perfect example of Paul urging early Christians to follow pagan laws. In the first century these exhortations by Paul were written to protect Christians from unnecessary persecution by having them follow the laws of their communities. However, Your Honor, 21st century evangelicals have changed the original meaning of these verses. Here’s an example.

Thomas Jacobson, formerly with Focus on the Family was quoted as saying, “It is not pleasing to God if a country rebels against His authority, and it is therefore rebellious, even dangerous to the country, for its citizens to question their leader when he is exercising his God-given authority.”

It is important, Your Honor, to realize that when Jacobson made this quote someone else was occupying the Oval Office. “Their leader” who was “exercising his God-given authority” was our former president. It is hard to imagine that Mr. Jacobson would say the same thing about the Obama administration. And you’ll notice, Your Honor, that according to Jacobson, it’s not for the protection of Christians, as was originally intended by Paul. Now it is for the protection of the country. It’s hard to imagine that the apostle Paul would write, “Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the Roman authorities, not only because of possible punishment but more importantly rebellion is dangerous to the Roman Empire.”

The use of these verses from Romans, has been used by conservative christians to ensure that their evangelical base did not question the President, which ultimately led to the events of January 6th. Many laws of our land were broken during those dark days following the 2020 election. Many of which were committed by our the President and his followers.

Judge: I must remind you, Counselor, that the former President is not on trial here.

Defense Attorney: We understand, Your Honor. The point we are trying to make is that adherence to these verses in Romans varies according to which political party is in power. For evangelicals, such as the plaintiff, these verses only apply when their political party is in power. We must remember that when Mr. Jacobson made his quote a man of questionable morals occupied the oval office. We doubt that Mr. Jacobson would have called on evangelicals to unquestionably follow Obama’s God-given authority or Biden’s. When their party is in control, christians fiercely adhere to these verses, but when the other party is in control, they defiantly ignore Romans 13:4-5 and actively resist their authority.

Judge: Your point, Counselor?

Defense Attorney: Since these verses are not applicable to all political situations, they cannot be considered a directive from God. The use of these verses here is therefore flawed and should not be allowed.

Judge: The court agrees that citizens should follow the laws of our land, but also acknowledges that unquestioned obedience to any leader is a danger to our Republic. It should be noted that the government is bringing punishment to many of the “wrongdoers” of January 6th. This accusation will be stricken.

On government – Romans 13:4-5 for the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

Defense Attorney: Thank you, Your Honor.

Judge: Bailiff, please read the next accusation. (Bailiff reads…)

On Jesus is God – “I and the Father are one.” John 10:30

Defense Attorney: We must point out, Your Honor, that there is a deeper meaning of this verse other than a defense of the Trinity. In support of the LGBTQ community, some people have noted that it is not recorded anywhere in the gospels that Jesus ever condemned homosexuality. The reason the plaintiff used this verse was to point out that according to the teachings of the Trinity, Jesus was fully God and thus fully supported all Jewish law including Leviticus 18:22. One christian blogger named Alan Shlemon wrote this…

“Since Jesus and the Holy Spirit co-exist in the Godhead and are in perfect communion through all eternity, we can be confident that Jesus agrees with the Holy Spirit about what He’s inspired to be written in Scripture.”

Defense Attorney: Mr. Shlemon makes a rather compelling 7-point defense of why the four gospels don’t include any instance of Jesus speaking out against homosexuality. We are prepared to dispute each point in question if the court wishes.

Judge: That won’t be necessary, Counselor. This court understands the reasoning behind the plaintiff’s use of this verse. What Jesus didn’t say is of no value in this court of law. The accusation will be stricken.

On Jesus is God – “I and the Father are one.” John 10:30

Defense Attorney: Thank you, Your Honor.

Judge: Bailiff, please read the next accusation. (Bailiff reads…)

REPENT AND BELIEVE  “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” – Mark 1:15

Defense Attorney: Your Honor, it should be noted in the court records that REPENT AND BELIEVE is all in caps, so it must be of some importance to the plaintiff.

Judge: So noted.

Defense Attorney: We’d like to remind the court that the plaintiff must demonstrate two items for his accusation to be valid. First, he must demonstrate that the progressive congregation has a belief or practice that is contrary to orthodox christianity and second, he must provide the chapter and verse that directly applies to their unorthodoxy. And a failure to do either one or both of these is a failure to prove his point.

Judge: The court remembers. Proceed.

Defense Attorney: We’d like to focus on the credence of the verse used. The first part of the verse says, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand;” It’s common knowledge among New Testament scholars that this verse was most likely penned in the middle or later part of the first century. Yet, here we are, 21 centuries later and it hasn’t happened. Yet Christians undauntedly are still using this verse as a warning that non-believers need to repent now “before it’s too late”.

Even more Your Honor, Jesus’ disciples were told (supposedly by Jesus) that the Kingdom would come in their life time. (I tell you truly, there are some of those standing here, who shall not taste death until they see the Kingdom of God.) It did not take place, yet modern day christians still believe that it will happen in theirs. We have our doubts that it will, Your Honor.

Judge: Agreed. Please continue.

Defense Attorney: The second part of that verse says, “repent and believe in the gospel.” So, let’s compare the orthodox view of the gospel with the progressive view of the gospel to see where the plaintiff thinks the progressives are in error.

These are the elements of the orthodox view of the gospel.

The gospel involves Jesus’ death on the cross as the sin offering to fulfill the Law’s righteous requirement. The gospel also involves Jesus’ resurrection on the third day. The gospel is the good news that “there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” This definition comes from a website called “Got Questions?”

These are the elements of the progressive view of the Gospel

Progressive: We are a progressive, Christ-centered church, founded on the life, teachings, death, resurrection, and eventual return of Jesus Christ. We believe that we belong to God long before, or even if we never believe in God. God’s love is eternal, always welcoming, and does not require any transaction on our part.

Defense Attorney: The only difference we can see is that the progressive congregation mentions a loving God, while the orthodox view of the gospel does not. However, it seems clear, Your Honor, that according to the progressive congregation’s mission statement they already believe in the gospel.  So, we’re left with the question, what does the plaintiff actually want them to repent from? The only thing we have been able to ascertain from his letter is that he objects to the progressive’s inclusion of the LGBTQ community which we have already covered.

So, Your Honor, since there is no evidence that after 2000 years the “time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is (finally) at hand” and, there is evidence that the progressive congregation does indeed already “believe in the gospel”, this accusation is invalid and should be stricken as well.

Judge: The Court agrees, it shall be stricken.

REPENT AND BELIEVE “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” – Mark 1:15

Defense Attorney: Thank you, Your Honor.

Judge: Is that all Counselor?

Defense Attorney: Yes, Your Honor that is the end of the hate message. I’d like to add that if we ever learn the identity of the author of this note, it might be helpful to have him/her present.

Judge: Agreed. This court is adjourned.

 

If you are the author of this note, we would love to talk with you.

You can contact us at mt.toll@comcast.net.

Coming next:

What’s love got to do with it?

God is Love. At least that’s what Christians say, but is that what they really teach? We’ll be taking a look at the mission statements of Evangelical Churches to see just how important Love, and particularly God’s Love, really is. You might be surprised by what we found or didn’t find.

 

 

From Where I Stand

Dec. 3, 2023

Dale Crum

 

<Previous Post / Next Post >

26 Nov, 2023

Blog

We Object, Your Honor 1/2

I’m not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but I thought it would be enlightening to pretend for this blog that we are in an actual court of law. The author of this hate note anonymously taped it to the door of the progressive church. If he had been forced to defend himself and his note, it might not have gone as he had planned.

It’s one thing to call someone a false believer and it’s quite another thing to prove it. That’s what we are going to examine in this blog. The author of the hate note did his deed in secret but we’re going to see if his words can withstand the test of scrutiny.  Here’s how!

In order for the author to demonstrate his case against the progressive church he/she must 1) demonstrate that the progressive congregation has a belief or practice that is contrary to orthodox christianity and 2) he must provide the chapter and verse that unequivocally applies to their heresy. A failure to do either one or both of these is a failure to prove his point.

So, let’s begin.

Judge: Bailiff, please read the first accusation for the court. (Bailiff reads…)

On God and Law – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1

Defense attorney: We object to this one, Your Honor on the basis that there is no correlation between “On God and Law” and this verse quoted from John 1. In addition, Your Honor, it is not clear what “law” the plaintiff is referring to here. Is he talking about the laws of our country? Is he talking about ancient Jewish law? If that’s the case, is he suggesting that we are still under Jewish law? Being an evangelical, surely the plaintiff doesn’t believe that. The apostle Paul was very clear that we were not still under Jewish law. In any case, it’s not clear why this verse is pertinent here.

Judge: The court agrees. Objection sustained.

Defense attorney: As to the other point, the plaintiff has not provided any evidence showing that the progressive congregation has broken any laws and therefore has failed to meet either of the criteria on this point. Therefore, this point is flawed and should be thrown out.

Judge: The court agrees. The accusation regarding “God and Law” has failed to meet its required burden of proof and is thus considered invalid.

On God and Law – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word as god.” John 1:1

Judge: Bailiff, please read the next accusation. (Bailiff reads…)

On relationships – “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Leviticus 18:22

Defense attorney: First off, Your Honor, we wish to point out that the Bible says a lot about relationships; our relationship with God, with each other, with other christians, with our neighbors, with the poor, with our enemies, and with the foreigner in our country. Most of what the bible says about “relationships” can be summed up one word: Love. As in, love the Lord your God, love your neighbor as yourself, love your enemies and show loving kindness to the poor and the foreigner in your mist. It also says “By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another”. We find it curious, Your Honor, why the plaintiff used this one verse from Leviticus to speak about the Bible’s stance on relationships, while ignoring all the others. We therefore suggest that “On relationships” is an inaccurate label for the accusation in question and should be considered invalid.

Judge: The court agrees. Proceed.

Defense attorney: Before we proceed to the second objection to this accusation, Your Honor, we feel the need to point out that there is another verse in Leviticus that condemns homosexuality. In that verse the punishment for homosexuality was death. Just like Exodus 35 where that the punishment for working on the sabbath was death. It was as wrong then as it is now. Surely, the plaintiff does not believe these verses should also be taken literally and should still be followed. At least one would hope so.

This is very concerning, Your Honor. If the plaintiff believes the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God, which as an evangelical he would, then he would believe both verses to be worthy of being followed. In the political environment we find ourselves in this day and age this is a very serious condition and might be considered as a possible veiled threat as well. We urge the court to make note of the possible dangers to the progressive congregation.

Judge: This court is well aware of the violent hate crimes perpetrated against the LGBTQ community. Do we know the identity of the person who wrote this note?

Defense attorney: We do not, Your Honor. The note was anonymously taped to the door of their church.

Judge: Your concerns are duly noted, Counselor. I assume that your clients are fully aware of their rights and protections offered to them under the law.

Defense attorney: They are, Your Honor.

Judge: Good! You may proceed.

Defense attorney: As to the other point, it is accurate that the progressive congregation is inclusive and embraces members of the LGBTQ community. This could be considered unorthodox in evangelical circles. The progressive congregation acknowledges this break from orthodox christianity, as we can see from their mission statement.

Progressive: Most churches in America make an exception to the full embrace of God by excluding LGBTQ-identifying individuals. From our evangelical roots, the full inclusion of LGBTQ people was a radical departure. We set out to embody a “new normal’ of what a church family should look like — LGBTQ and Straight individuals and families worshiping and learning together in shared community

Defense attorney: Your Honor, we would like to propose here is that the verse from Leviticus used by the plaintiff is subject to different interpretations depending on a person’s hermeneutics and should be discounted as invalid. We first would like to submit the writings of a pastor named Colby Martin, who has written a book about these verses in the bible that condemn homosexuality. He believes that those verses have been misinterpreted for centuries.

Colby Martin

Churches in America are experiencing an unprecedented fracturing due to their belief and attitude toward the LGBTQ community. Armed with only six passages in the Bible–often known as the “clobber passages”–the traditional Christian position has been one that stands against the full inclusion of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. Unclobber reexamines each of those frequently quoted passages of Scripture. UnClobber reexamines what the Bible says (and does not say) about homosexuality in such a way that breathes fresh life into outdated and inaccurate assumptions and interpretations. 

Defense attorney: We would also like to present as Exhibit B a conversation with the pastor of the progressive congregation who is herself gay.

There are seven passages, which we sometimes call the clobber passages, and they, at first glance, look like they are condemning homosexuality. But I really don’t think that’s what those passages are about. And it took me a long time to get there.

Clobber verses are six or seven really short sentences or paragraphs from the bible that have been used to clobber gay people, and try to tell them that they shouldn’t be that way. That they should repent. That they should stop being homosexual. There are so many more passages in the bible about poverty, right? And we ignore those and focus on these six or seven. They’re called clobber verses because they’ve clobbered people for so many years.

I did use those to clobber myself. Because for a long time, my hermeneutic, the lens through which I read the scriptures, told me that those six or seven passages should be followed literally. So, when Romans condemns homosexuality, it was condemning me. So, I beat myself up with those passages. I clobbered myself. It took a long time to even be willing to think that I might have been wrong about how I understood the bible.

I found lots of theologians, some Presbyterian, some former Evangelicals, some in the United Church of Christ who were saying that we have been wrong about these passages of scriptures that we’ve been interpreting as a punishment and as an indictment on gay people. I just all of a sudden, found theologians, who really understood the scriptures, who were like, “No, it’s okay that you are gay.”

Defense attorney: Your Honor, what is clear here is that the verse from Leviticus used by the plaintiff is subject to different interpretations depending on a person’s hermeneutics.  In the same book of Leviticus there is a verse, and I quote, “You are to keep my statues. You shall not breed together two kinds of cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of materials mixed together.” Your Honor, today I am wearing a shirt that is a cotton/polyester blend. If I were to show up in the plaintiff’s evangelical church on Sunday wearing this shirt, would I be unwelcomed because of Leviticus 19:19? Certainly not!

However, Your Honor, based on Leviticus 18:22, members of the LGBTQ community would be not be welcomed? Adhering to one fragment of Jewish law and not to others is simply unjust.  The plaintiff may not use one point of Jewish law at his discretion and disregard others. The accusation regarding “On Relationships” is unclear and has failed to meet its required burden of proof. We therefore request that the plaintiff’s use of the verse should be viewed as flawed and therefore disregarded.

Judge: We are certainly not under Jewish law in this court. While the court recognizes the plaintiff’s freedom of religion, it also acknowledges that biblical scripture is open to personal interpretation and holds no weight in this courtroom. Therefore, the Court considers it invalid.

On relationships – “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Leviticus 18:22

Defense attorney: Thank you, Your Honor.

 

Coming Next: We Object, Your Honor (conclusion)

We will scrutinize the remaining parts of the hate message.

(On government, On Jesus is God, and REPENT AND BELIEVE)

 

 

From Where I Stand

Nov 26, 2023

Dale Crum

 

<Previous Post / Next Post >

19 Nov, 2023

Blog

A Conversation with a Progressive Pastor

Jenny is a pastor of a progressive congregation. During our conversation Pastor Jenny talked frankly about her spiritual journey to reconcile her love of God, her lifelong devotion to ministry, and her identifying as being gay.

(As a secularist I do not hold the same beliefs as Pastor Jenny. However, I believe her story is worth telling.)

———————————————————-

Mt. Toll Productions: So, tell us a bit about yourself.

Jenny: I’m ordained in the United Church of Christ, and have my doctorate degree from Fuller Seminary.

MTP: Ministry is your profession, right?

Jenny: Yes, ministry is my profession and I have felt called into ministry in terms of preaching the gospel and working toward a more just and generous world since I was 16. I felt God’s calling on my life to help other people understand how much God loves them since I was 16 or 17 years old. And I spent a big chunk of my young adulthood working for another ministry organization, a much more conservative organization, where I learned a lot, and grew a lot, but I don’t really identify with them anymore. And I spent the last 12 years here serving as co-pastor. And I love it, absolutely love it.

I was probably 12 years old when I began to feel like I’m different.

MTP: You’re gay, right?

Jenny: I am gay.

MTP: So, when did you begin to understand that you were different?

Jenny: I was probably 12 years old when I began to feel like I’m different. The way I framed it then was, there is something wrong with me. Other young girls my age were having crushes on boys, and I really wasn’t. So, I felt like there’s something wrong with me that I kind of have to hide.

MTP: Did you grow up going to church?

Jenny: I did! I grew up Catholic. All three of my siblings grew up, obviously, in the same little Catholic Parish I did, and they ended up turning away from the church completely. But I loved the church. Yeah, the Catholic church did not hurt me. The Catholic church encouraged my faith.

MTP: Did you ever consider becoming a nun?

Jenny: I did. I thought about it a lot, because that is the only role that women can take professionally as a calling in the Catholic Church. But I didn’t want to wear the dresses they wore, and I wanted to preach the gospel. I wanted to preach the good news. So, I couldn’t find myself as a nun, at all. And (laughing) I was afraid that I might be attracted to them.

MTP: You mean the other nuns?

Jenny: Yeah! (laughing) So I stayed away from that, but I remained Catholic for a long time.

MTP: Evangelicals talk of a conversion experience. Catholics don’t really have that do they?

Jenny: You know, Catholics have a different understanding of conversion than we do as Protestants, and I think that I have always had a Protestant understanding, even when I was Catholic. So, I was about 10 years old, maybe 11, standing in the back of our little Catholic church, and looking up at the cross, which is a Crucifix in the Catholic Church, so Jesus is hanging on it. And I remember looking up at him, on the cross and thinking, if he did that, if he died, he must love me so much. So, I see that as my conversion moment. My journey with God began somewhere during that year of my life, that I’m aware of.

MTP: You’ve had a passion for ministry almost your whole life?

Jenny: Yes, since I was 16.

MTP: Could you tell us more about how you felt called into ministry?

Jenny: Sure! I first went to college, as a musician, as a percussionist and a drummer. I went to a very expensive school, so even though I felt called into ministry, I thought I should follow through with my degree. So, I spent a year teaching high school music, but just couldn’t resist the call into ministry much longer than that. So, I went into ministry from then until now.

MTP: How old were you when you began working in ministry?

Jenny: I was 22 or 23.

MTP: But you hadn’t come out yet?

Jenny: That’s true, I had not come out yet, and in fact was trying to hide and not even able to use the word “gay”. It just felt like… I don’t know… like a really heavy, negative, bad thing. I was not out at all, but I was in and out of relationships with women, that I had to keep hidden.

I lived a double life.

MTP: Would you say you were exploring?

Jenny: I was exploring. Like all 20-year-olds, I was following my attractions and my desires. And I had to hide all that. I wish I didn’t.

MTP: What do you mean by that?

I wish I could have talked with somebody about my desires and my dreams.

Jenny: I wish I hadn’t lied to myself. I wish I hadn’t pretended that I was something I wasn’t. I wished that I could have been in a place like this Church, which didn’t exist back then, so my wish was wishful thinking. I wish I could have talked with somebody about my desires and my dreams, but I couldn’t.

MTP: You didn’t have anybody?

Jenny: Nobody!

MTP: So, did you feel that who you were as a person was unacceptable in Christian circles?

Jenny: Yeah, it was unacceptable in all the Christian circles that I was walking in, at that time. It was like I was duplicitous. I lived a double life. And that has taken a toll on me.

MTP: So, when and how did you come out?

Jenny: I didn’t really, honestly come out publicly, and to myself completely until I was 40 or 41.

MTP: What was that like?

Jenny: Well, I came out to myself first. You know, I had to first acknowledge, to myself, that there’s not something wrong with me, and, that I am what I am. I am gay. So, the first piece was coming out to myself and finding peace with God. And then I came out to my family, who were all very loving and receptive and embracing of who I was. And then slowly over time I came out to friends who really believed that I was lying to myself. Whereas I had been lying to myself for – I don’t know – twenty-five years.

MTP: You have a partner, right?

Jenny: I do, yes!

MTP: Are you guys married?

Jenny: We are not married. We like to say we’re living in sin. (Laughter) I say that as a joke, right? We aren’t married yet, in part because, we’re not sure we trust… marriage. We trust God, and we have a beautiful community that supports us, but I’m not sure that getting married would make us any more committed to each other than we already are.

MTP: You were walking in conservative circles at that time. Were there people who weren’t as receptive to your coming out?

Hundreds of people felt the need to disassociate from me and to disown me.

Jenny: I had lots of friends in my life at that time, who felt like I’d be going straight to hell if I embraced being gay. So, that part was traumatic, in some ways, because many, many people felt the need to disassociate from me and to disown me. I mean literally hundreds of people. Hundreds of people did not want to be in relationship with me because I was naming that I was gay. We would say today, “defriended me”, but Facebook wasn’t around then. They just did not want to have any relational connection with me. They were condemning me for being gay.

MTP: How did you handle that?

Jenny: Oh gosh! At the time I just had to walk away from it.  I had to just walk away. I stopped answering phone calls. I stopped responding to emails.

MTP: Were people trying to fix you?

It was like I was now one of the fallen.

Jenny: Yeah, trying to fix me, or correct me, or communicate their disappointment in me. That was probably the hardest thing. I was almost at a VP level in this organization, so I knew hundreds of people around the country. And I was well liked and well respected. It was like I was now one of the fallen. But I did not see myself that way at all. I saw myself as beginning to tell the truth. People in that particular ministry could not support the direction I had taken spiritually, theologically… personally. So, there was quite a bit of rejection in that. But at the same time, I was partnering with the woman I’m partnered to now, Christy. So, it was bitter sweet, right? Because I found myself falling in love, and feeling a deep commitment to someone.

MTP: You were 40?

I was furious with God, because I’m thinking, “I shouldn’t be gay.

Jenny: Yeah, 41 or 42. I’d started to think about it for the years before that, of course. Throughout my 20s and 30s I kept hearing God say to me, “I love you. Stop lying.” It just took me a long time to realize God wasn’t saying, “Stop being gay.” God was saying, “Stop lying to yourself about this. I know who you are and I love you exactly the way you are.” It took me a long time to hear that. So, when I met Christy and started to fall in love, at first, I was furious with God, because I’m thinking, “I shouldn’t be gay.” That’s what I thought. “And You brought this person into my life that I have fallen head over heels in love with?” I was mad at God. And then Christy said, “I’m not going to hide in the closet with you. You’ve got to work this out with God.”

MTP: Had she already had come out?

I studied hard because I wanted a family relationship with Christy.

Jenny: Yes, she had already come out, and was very much at peace in her faith and with Christ and with her family. So, she said, “I’m not going to hide. You have to figure this out with God. Then we can decide if we can be committed to each other.” So, I did! I found lots of theologians who were saying that we have been wrong about these passages of scriptures that we’ve been interpreting as a punishment and as an indictment on gay people. I just all of a sudden, found theologians, who really understood the scriptures, who were like, “No, it’s okay that you are gay.” So, I studied hard because I wanted a relationship… I wanted a family relationship with Christy. It took a long time to even be willing to think that I might have been wrong about how I understood the bible.

MTP: In one of your sermons, you talked about “clobber passages”. What is meant by that?

Jenny: There are seven passages, that we sometimes call the clobber passages, and they, at first glance, look like they are condemning homosexuality. But I really don’t think that’s what those passages are about. And it took me a long time to get there.

MTP: Can you tell us more about “clobber verses”?

Jenny: Clobber verses are six or seven really short sentences or paragraphs from the bible that have been used to clobber gay people, and try to tell them that they shouldn’t be that way. They should repent. That they should stop being homosexual. There are so many more passages in the bible about poverty, right? But we ignore those and focus on those six or seven. They’re called clobber verses because they’ve clobbered people for so many years.

MTP: Have you used those verses to clobber yourself?

Jenny: I did use those to clobber myself. Because for a long time, my hermeneutic, the lens through which I read the scriptures, told me that those six or seven passages should be followed literally. So, when Romans condemns homosexuality, it was condemning me. So, I beat myself up with those passages. I clobbered myself.

MTP: Tell us more about that. Were other people shaming you for being gay?

Jenny: I’m not sure if it only came from other people. I think some of the shame came from inside me because of the way that I was reading the scriptures. My hermeneutic told me that I was wrong, that being gay was wrong and I should either be celibate my whole life or pray that God would heal me so I could be heterosexual. And that was my understanding of the scriptures. So, I was as much the one shaming myself as other people who agreed with me. It took a change in how I understood the scriptures for me to not feel shame.

MTP: Tell me more.

I felt some shame because I thought I was broken, because I was gay or different.

Jenny: So, I’m reading the scriptures and thinking that I’m wrong… that there’s something wrong with me, not just that I’m doing something wrong. So, the guilt is feeling like I’m doing something wrong and the shame comes from thinking there’s something wrong with me. And so, I felt some shame because I thought I was broken, because I was gay or different. I couldn’t even say the word “gay” back then. It was like embarrassing. It was like a curse. It isn’t anymore. I freely tell people I’m gay. But back then, in my 30s, it felt like a curse that I couldn’t get away from, no matter what I did. I begged God to heal me.

MTP: Did you ever go to conversion therapy?

Jenny: It wasn’t really conversion therapy, but yes, I did go into therapy. I had a few really good therapists who took me at my word, and I said, “I don’t want to be this. I don’t want to be gay. Can you help me get rid of this?” They were not reparative therapist. They were good christian therapists, so I never felt hurt by those people. I felt like they were trying to help me grow and move in the way I wanted to. It didn’t work. But it did work to help me grow closer to Jesus. It really did!

MTP: In what way?

“There is now therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.”

Jenny: Well, I felt from these therapist… what they tried to tell me was… you know… there are some passages in Romans that are very difficult for conservatives to think about homosexuality.

MTP: Romans 1?

Jenny: Yes, Romans 1. But there are other passages in Romans that are beautiful, and you don’t even need to interpret them. Romans 8:1 says, “There is now therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” And I had one therapist who, that was the only thing he wanted me to know. That no matter what I felt, no matter what I thought, no matter what I became, because of Christ there is no condemnation. I’ll never forget that. So, that helped me grow closer to God and lessen some of the shame.  So, I don’t have any war stories of conversion therapy. In fact, I was part of an organization that’s now gone, so I’ll tell you the name of it. It was called Living Waters. And they were helping gay people like me get healed. So, I went through their program, and they recognized some of my gifts for ministry, and teaching and leadership and asked me to be a leader in their program and I was… while I’m having a relationship with a woman on the side. (Laughing) And, I find out later, so were all of them… having homosexual relationships. It was like such a mess. (Shaking head)

MTP: And now…?

I’m not lying anymore. I’m not living a double life.

Jenny: Since being partnered with Christy… so Christy and I have been together 16 years, I’m not lying anymore. I’m not living a double life. I’m really grateful for that. But, some of the people when I left that former Evangelical organization, I had several people say to me, “I liked you better when you were lying.” So, they wanted me to stay in their community, but I could only do that if I was lying. And I think that’s what they wanted. So, at that point, I’m like, “I know for a fact, that this is not what God wants from me… to keep lying.” God has made that clear to me, almost in an audible voice, “Honey, stop lying. I love you!” So, when somebody said that to me, within evangelicalism, I felt free to leave, because I know for certain that is not what God wants for me.

Jenny: Can I share a quick story about that?

MTP: Of course, you can.

Jenny: My sister, who is a few years younger than I am, is also gay. And she came out 10 to 12 years before I did… before I was ever ready to even think about it. And I condemned her so badly. I even said to her things like, “You might go to hell because you are gay.” I was the evangelical church in this situation. I remember privately thinking, “God, how can you let her have that and I can’t?” So, that’s why I was so hard on her.

MTP: Was it like, “How can You let her be happy and not me”?

Jenny: That’s privately what I said to God, but what I said to her was, “You better not do this.”

MTP: Was she in a relationship?

Jenny: (Laughing) She was, and that made it even harder on me. We have since completely reconciled and she has forgiven me, but for a while I was really mean to my little sister, trying to figure myself out.

MTP: Final thoughts?

Being gay is not a mistake that we have to fix.

Jenny: Once I worked through the passages of scripture and prayer too, I felt God’s blessing on me as a gay person. And what I understand to be God’s blessing is God’s affirmation. I mean, I felt God saying to me, “Honey, I love you, and I made you this way… I made you this way.”  It’s not just okay. God made me this way. This is what God wanted. This is not a mistake that we have to fix.

MTP: Thank you for your time.

Jenny: You’re welcome. It’s been a pleasure!

From Where I Stand

Pastor Jenny is one of the most genuine believers I have ever encountered. She is courageous in the face of evangelical criticism and passionate about sharing “God’s Love” with anyone who is willing to accept it. The fact that she was rejected by so many of her evangelical friends says more about their beliefs than it does hers.

“I feel God’s blessing on me as a gay person. It’s not just okay, God made me this way. This is what God wanted. This is not a mistake that we have to fix.”

For more information about “clobber verses” visit Colby Martin’s “The Bible does not condemn LGBTQ people“.

For information about contacting Pastor Jenny, email us at mt.toll@comcast.net

Coming next:

It’s one thing to call someone a false christian and it’s quite another to prove it. We’ll return to our discussion about the hate message that was taped to the door of the progressive church and examine the validity of the verses used to shame them.

 

 

From Where I Stand

Nov. 19, 2023

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

12 Nov, 2023

Blog

Evangelical Hate Mail (1/3)

“Christian arguments with false teachers in their midst happened a lot, as far back as we have records. These internal Christian debates were often filled with vitriol and hatred. Christians called one another nasty names, said ugly thing about one another and pulled out all stops to make their Christian opponents look reprehensible and stupid.” Dr. Bart Ehrman in Forged.

 

As mentioned in my previous blog, it’s baffling to me that with all the talk of “God’s love” in their mission statement, the progressive congregation still receives hate mail from conservative christians. One such hate letter, taped to their front door, accused them of  “false teachings”.

 

 

Here is the hate message in its entirety. (If you are the author of this note, I would love to talk to you.)

Beware of False Teachings – 2 Corinthians 11:13-15

  • On God and Law – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1
  • On relationships – “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Leviticus 18:22
  • On government – “for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.” Romans 13:4
  • On Jesus is God – “I and the Father are one.” John 10:30
  • REPENT AND BELIEVE – “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” – Mark 1:15

What became clear to me, while reading this hate message, is that its author apparently knows practically nothing about the progressive church and what they actually believe. It’s obvious that he/she has never read their mission statement nor ever spoken to anyone associated with the church. It’s probable that the only thing he knows about them is that they are an inclusive church, welcoming the LGBTQ community, and that they have women pastors.  Even though the author uses scripture to support his condemnation, there is little evidence to suggest that he actually understands the random verses he quoted.  If it weren’t such a blatant expression of ignorance and bigotry it might be considered rather humorous.

In part two of this blog we will explore each part for its validity, but first we’ll explore the history of christians calling other christians false teachers.

Let’s start with the verses from “TWO Corinthians“, as someone near and dear to evangelicals’ heart would say. And since we’re talking about people who disguise themselves as apostles of Christ, why is it that somebody who is completely ignorant about the bible is not seen as an obviously false christian? Why has that someone instead earned the status (among evangelicals) as the “anointed”? But that’s a topic for another blog. For now, let’s get back to the hate note.

Beware of False Teachings – 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ, and no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore, it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their deeds.

According to New Testament scholar Dr, Bart Ehrman, contrary to what most christians believe, Christianity was very divided in the first couple of centuries. Many different groups with conflicting beliefs called themselves Christians and each group believed that only their version of christianity was the one true religion. (Sound familiar?) Many of the letters in the New Testament were written, and sometimes forged, in fierce defense of their one true religion.

“Christian arguments with false teachers in their midst happened a lot, as far back as we have records. Our earliest Christian author was Paul, and in virtually every one of his letters it is clear that he had opponents on all sides. One thing that these attacks show, beyond dispute, is that virtually everywhere Paul went, even within his own churches, he and his views were under steady assault by Christians who thought and believed differently. Paul’s opponents in the church of Corinth insisted that he was a weak and pathetic speaker who showed no evidence of being empowered by God.” Bart Ehrman, Forged, chapter 6.

Paul had to respond. So, in his second letter to the Corinthians as found in chapter 11 he responds to the criticism aimed at him. This response from Paul is what the writer of the hate note is referring to when he says, “beware of false teachers”. I have paraphrased what Paul is really saying in his defense, (starting with verse 5.)

Paul’s response:

“Hey I’m as good as or better than those other apostles. I might not be good at speaking, but I’m knowledgeable. Can’t you see that? I didn’t even take any money from you guys. I stole from somebody else so I didn’t have to. And this is the thanks I get? You believe somebody else’s gospel?  They’re all fakes and I’m the real deal. I don’t mean to boast, all though I know I foolishly am, but just take a look at my credentials. I’ve been beaten numerous times, shipwrecked, hunted, and I just barely escaped being arrested in Damascus. Okay, so maybe I’m boasting but bear with me because the gospel I’m teaching is the real one. These men call themselves christians but they are deceitful fakes. It’s no big surprise because even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. These guys who oppose me are his servants and they disguise themselves as christians, but it will all come back on them, you just watch and see.”

So much for “we’ll just have to agree to disagree”. What Paul is really saying here is that anyone who criticizes him or questions his authority is of the devil and is evil. By the way, this is the only reference to “Satan as an angel of light” in the entire bible.

Disguised as an angel of light?

How many times have christians used that “angel of light” phrase as an excuse to discount people with whom they disagree? “I’m a christian and you’re a heathen, end of discussion”. This simple-minded reasoning makes it so easy for christians to dismiss others who believe differently. I see this all the time in my research of christian writers, but that doesn’t make it right. What the author of the note is implying is that those darn progressives are disguising themselves as christians but they are actually servants of Satan. That is absolutely absurd and here’s why.

The progressive church is extending God’s love to everyone regardless of who they are or who they love. The author of this note doesn’t like that concept. Perhaps he (like most evangelicals) doesn’t believe that everyone is worthy to receive God’s love and he (being a true christian) will be the judge of who is worthy. So, if the progressive congregation extends God’s love to everyone, including to those whom the author deems unworthy, then they are false christians. That’s the bottom line.

An Enduring Christian Tradition:

It’s interesting that of all the traditions of the first century church, like communal living (gone), shared possessions (gone), and living a life of poverty (gone), the one that has survived to the 21st century is the tradition of “Christians calling one another nasty names”. So, if there’s one good thing that can be said about the author of this note, it’s that he is continuing a first century christian tradition. If it’s good enough for Paul, then it’s good enough for modern day christians.

Even though it’s obvious that the author of this hate message knows very little about the progressive church, that doesn’t deter him or other evangelicals from calling them false christians. As we will see, it doesn’t even matter if their criticisms are unwarranted. What really matters is that they feel righteous in their judgement.

In my next blog we will put the author’s criticisms to the test, but for now let’s focus on what the progressive congregation really teaches and then perhaps we can discover why the author of this note felt the need to call them false and deceitful christians.

Progressive stance:

  • Salvation: “The teachings of Jesus have led us to believe that… Christ died for all the world and God’s love is accessible and available to everyone, everywhere. The embrace of God is an inclusive, unstoppable love that calls us to believe and bear witness to the belovedness of every human being. God’s love is eternal, always welcoming, and does not require any transaction on our part.”
  • Our Relationship with God: “We cannot create our union with God. It is objectively given. There’s nothing we can do or not do to increase or decrease God’s love for us.”
  • Spiritual practices: “Our mission is… ‘to do justice, love kindness, and to walk humbly with God.’ We believe that when we embody this mission, we will be an extension of God’s welcome in the world.”
  • Our life in Christ:  “As a faith community, our call is to accept that we are already accepted by God, and to live a life imitating God’s love.”

Not being an evangelical any longer, I’m not really sure what the writer of this note objects to about the progressive mission statement (if he had actually read it). Perhaps here are some things with which evangelicals might take issue.

  • God’s love is accessible and available to everyone, everywhere
  • The embrace of God is an inclusive, unstoppable love that calls us to believe and bear witness to the belovedness of every human being.
  • God’s love is eternal, always welcoming.
  • God’s love does not require any transaction on our part.
  • There’s nothing we can do or not do to increase or decrease God’s love for us.
  • Our call is to accept that we are already accepted by God, and to live a life imitating God’s love

From Where I Stand

This is only a portion of progressive mission statement yet notice how many times God’s love is mentioned. If we really can judge a tree by its fruit, the progressives’ repeated reference to God’s love is a pretty clear indication that it’s important to them.

If the progressives’ “end shall be according to their deeds”

…then it will undoubtedly be a good ending.

Coming next: A Conversation With a Progressive Pastor

During our conversation with a pastor of the progressive congregation, she talked frankly about her spiritual journey to reconcile her love of God, her lifelong devotion to ministry, and her identifying as being gay.

 

 

From Where I Stand

Nov. 12, 2023

Dale Crum

 

<Previous Post / Next Post >

5 Nov, 2023

Blog

Evangelical vs Progressive Christianity

What do they actually believe?

Part nine: LGBTQ Inclusion

This is the 9th (and last) in a series of blogs where we are comparing the mission statements of an evangelical congregation with that of a progressive congregation. By scrolling down you can find the previous eight blogs.

  1. Foundation of Faith
  2. The Trinity
  3. God’s Relationship with Humanity
  4. Nature of Salvation
  5. Humanity’s Relationship with God
  6. Spiritual Practices
  7. Purpose of Spiritual Community
  8. Social Responsibility

They are located below in reverse order (newest to oldest). Feel free to read them in any order you choose, but they might make more sense if you read them in order. For what it’s worth.

Also, I need to interject here that I do not believe in the theology of either congregation, but I do have an opinion about which dogma, or which view of God is healthier for humanity. Once again, what matters here is how each congregation views…

LGBTQ Inclusion

Evangelical:

Progressive: “Most churches in America make an exception to the full embrace of God by excluding LGBTQ-identifying individuals. From our evangelical roots, the full inclusion of LGBTQ people was a radical departure. We set out to embody a “new normal’ of what a church family should look like — LGBTQ and Straight individuals and families worshiping and learning together in shared community.”

Enough said!

Point for Progressive! 9-0

Summary

“Everything in this strange system (Christianity) is the reverse of what it pretends to be. It is the reverse of truth, and I become so tired of examining into its inconsistencies and absurdities, that I hasten to the conclusion of it, in order to proceed to something better.” Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason 1794.

Everything in evangelicalism is the reverse of what it pretends to be.

With that in mind, let’s sum up the major differences between these two churches. Evangelicals says they believe that salvation is not the result of any human effort or merit, but when you read their mission statement there really is a lot of trying to please God.

Becoming a christian and being “saved” may be a free gift, but being a christian requires a great deal of “effort”. Staying in God’s good graces is essential and the responsibility for maintaining a good relationship with God falls entirely on humanity. The evangelical mission statement focuses on the effort (works) that must be observed in order to stay right with God. However, they never actually mention God’s love, (not even once). Let’s look at what the evangelical requirements really are for being a good christian.

A serving of christianity with a side of works:

  • We are a group of people trying to figure out what it looks like to live in the way of Jesus with the heart of Jesus today.
  • It is our privilege to rejoice in the assurance of our salvation. While our assurance is secure, this assurance must not become an occasion for sin.
  • Learning grace is the process of transformation. We are convinced transformation happens by grace as we align our lives with the gospel.
  • We participate in worship, prayer, scripture reading, memorization, sabbath, generosity, silence, solitude, and more. (Works)
  • We long to be formed into the image of our Lord and Rabbi, Jesus.
  • The gospel is hope for healing all things.
  • Jesus models what it means to be a whole human being and we long to live in his way.
  • We long to become more like Jesus.

As you can see much of evangelical’s mission statement expresses a desire to be like Jesus. Admittedly, it’s an honorable and lofty goal, but totally unattainable. If a person believes that Jesus was perfect and gave himself as a “sinless sacrifice”, then trying to live up to that standard of perfection can only lead to a lifetime of failure and the accompanying feeling that you are a constant disappointment to God. Who wants to live like that?

Conversely, the progressive view of humanity’s relationship with God is one of love and acceptance (no transaction is required, no club to join).

Progressive: “God’s love is eternal, always welcoming, and does not require any transaction on our part. We cannot create our union with God. It is objectively given. There’s nothing we can do or not do to increase or decrease God’s love for us.  As a faith community, our call is to accept that we are already accepted by God, and to live a life imitating God’s love.”

Progressive don’t have a list of things they must do daily to please God, because they believe that they are already pleasing to God. Imagine that!

However, they do have a list but it’s a rather short one.

  • do justice,
  • love kindness
  • walk humbly with God.

I sometimes wonder how my former evangelical friends would react to the progressive view of God. Would an unconditional loving God be too much for them? Apparently so.

 

What’s baffling to me is that with all the talk of “God’s love” in their mission statement, the progressive congregation still receives hate mail from conservative christians. One such hate letter was taped to the front door of the progressive church and called them “false prophets”.

 

What becomes clear, while reading this hate message, is that its author knows practically nothing about the progressive church and what they actually believe.  It’s obvious that he has never read their mission statement nor ever spoken to anyone associated with the church. It’s probable that the only things he knew about them is that they are an inclusive church, welcoming the LGBTQ community, and that they have women pastors.  Even though the author uses scripture to support his condemnation, there is little evidence to suggest that he actually understood the random verses he quoted.  If it weren’t such a blatant expression of ignorance and bigotry it might be considered humorous. This will be the topic of my next blog.

Coming next: Evangelical hate mail

Beware of False Teachings: For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ…

This should be interesting. So, until then, thanks for reading. If you found this blog series helpful in some way, feel free to share it with someone who would also benefit from it. And check out my YouTube video regarding the Reform Presbyterian Church’s condemnation of the LGTBQ community.

 

 

From Where I Stand

Nov. 5, 2023

Dale Crum

 

<Previous Post / Next Post >

29 Oct, 2023

Blog

Evangelical vs Progressive Christianity

What do they actually believe?

Part eight: Social Responsibility

This is the 8th in a series of blogs where we are comparing the mission statements of an evangelical congregation with that of a progressive congregation. By scrolling down you can find the previous seven blogs.

  1. Foundation of Faith
  2. The Trinity
  3. God’s Relationship with Humanity
  4. Nature of Salvation
  5. Humanity’s Relationship with God
  6. Spiritual Practices
  7. Purpose of Spiritual Community

They are located below in reverse order (newest to oldest). Feel free to read them in any order you choose, but they might make more sense if you read them in order. For what it’s worth.

Also, I need to interject here that I do not believe in the theology of either congregation, but I do have an opinion about which dogma, or which view of God is healthier for humanity. Once again, what matters here is how each congregation views their…

Social Responsibility

Evangelical: “We equip people with vision and tools for joining in God’s redemptive plan. That’s why we are passionate about relieving suffering, fighting injustice, and hold out the gospel as the hope of renewing all things.”

Progressive: “Our starting point in the story of God is that all humans were created in love and for love. There is no hierarchy of value for a human life. But when dehumanization occurs, especially in the form of violence, we must turn again to Christ, who taught us that what we do to the most vulnerable, we have also done unto him. And we must ask for guidance from the Spirit as we critically examine ourselves, our institutions, our beliefs, and our practices which retain and perpetuate expressions of violence against non-white bodies.”

“For more than ten years, we have sought to answer the call to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with God. We will continue to take care of those who are harmed by unjust systems. We will insist on fairness for all people. We will remain loyal to those who have no voice. We will oppose authority when those in charge abuse their power.  We will hold sacred the bodies of black and brown people. We will work for justice until there is true liberty for all.”

“This is an essential part of our work as followers of the One who came and suffered in solidarity with the oppressed and marginalized, and who gave us the most important of all the commands: to love God, love our neighbors, and love ourselves.”

This is the first time that the progressive statement is longer than the evangelical one. The reason will become clear soon enough. But first let’s look at what the evangelical congregation says about social responsibility.

Evangelical: “We equip people with vision and tools for joining in God’s redemptive plan.”

Not quite sure what this has to do with social responsibility but here we are again, back at God’s redemptive plan. Once again evangelicals have not been specific about what they mean by “vision and tools” for joining that plan. This leads me to believe that they don’t really have either, vision or tools. It sounds good, but talk is cheap.

Evangelical: “That’s why we are passionate about relieving suffering, fighting injustice, and hold out the gospel as the hope of renewing all things.”

Notice that evangelicals may be “passionate about relieving suffering and fighting injustice” but they don’t have any specifics plans for actually achieving that passion. Their only plan is to “hold out the gospel as hope of renewing all things.” Once again there’s that silver bullet that this time will magically solve all social injustice issues. How has that worked out so far?

“to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of mine,

even the least of them, you did it to me”.

Now, let’s look at the progressive stance on social responsibility.

Progressive: “Our starting point in the story of God is that all humans were created in love and for love. There is no hierarchy of value for a human life. But when dehumanization occurs, especially in the form of violence, we must turn again to Christ, who taught us that what we do to the most vulnerable, we have also done unto him. And we must ask for guidance from the Spirit as we critically examine ourselves, our institutions, our beliefs, and our practices which retain and perpetuate expressions of violence against non-white bodies.”

I believe this idea comes from Matthew 25.

“For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat; I was thirsty and you gave me drink; I was a stranger and you invited me in; naked, and you clothed me; I was sick, and you visited me; I was in prison and you came to me” Then the righteous will answer him saying, “when did we do all this for you”? And the King will answer and say to them, “to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of mine, even the least of them, you did it to me”.

Notice that for progressives the path to social justice involves critical examination of ourselves, our institutions and our own practices. There are people in our country (in fact entire states) that believe social injustice is a myth, and to critically examine our institutions is an act of treason. Fortunately for “the least of them” the progressives have chosen to ignore such falsehoods and actually have a plan to fight injustice.

Progressive: “For more than ten years, we have sought to answer the call to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with God. We will continue to take care of those who are harmed by unjust systems. We will insist on fairness for all people. We will remain loyal to those who have no voice. We will oppose authority when those in charge abuse their power.  We will hold sacred the bodies of black and brown people. We will work for justice until there is true liberty for all.”

Rather than just saying that they are passionate about “relieving suffering and fighting injustice” progressives have chosen to act on their beliefs in the form of specific behaviors. Take a minute and reread the list of what they will do. Now that we have seen how they will battle injustice, let’s look at why they do it.

“This is an essential part of our work as followers of the One who came and suffered in solidarity with the oppressed and marginalized, and who gave us the most important of all the commands: to love God, love our neighbors, and love ourselves.”

There you have it. No empty words. No false hope. No magic silver bullet. Just action… because God commanded us to love.

Point for Progressive! 8-0

Coming up next:

We will examine what each congregation has to say about…

LGBTQ Inclusion

Evangelical:

Progressive: “Most churches in America make an exception to the full embrace of God by excluding LGBTQ-identifying individuals. From our evangelical roots, the full inclusion of LGBTQ people was a radical departure. We set out to embody a “new normal’ of what a church family should look like — LGBTQ and Straight individuals and families worshiping and learning together in shared community.”

 

From Where I Stand

Oct. 29, 2023

Dale Crum

 

<Previous Post / Next Post >

22 Oct, 2023

Blog

Evangelical vs Progressive Christianity

What do they actually believe?

Part seven: Purpose of Spiritual Community

This is the 7th in a series of blogs where we are comparing the mission statements of an evangelical congregation with that of a progressive congregation. By scrolling down you can find the previous six blogs.

  1. Foundation of Faith
  2. The Trinity
  3. God’s Relationship with Humanity
  4. Nature of Salvation
  5. Humanity’s Relationship With God
  6. Spiritual Practices

They are located below in reverse order (newest to oldest). Feel free to read them in any order you choose, but they might make more sense if you read them in order. For what it’s worth.

Also, I need to interject here that I do not believe in the theology of either congregation (including, in this blog, the story of the Flood). But I do have an opinion about which dogma or which view of God is healthier for humanity. Once again, what matters here is how each congregation views the…

Purpose of Their Spiritual Community 

Evangelical: “Therefore, we want to be a colony of hope reminding the world all of life is sacred and all of our fears, failures, and brokenness can be restored and made whole. Our church does not exist for ourselves, but to join God in his redemptive work… and we see ourselves as agents of God’s Kingdom for the betterment of his world. The church is at its best when it serves, sacrifices, and loves, caring about the things God cares about.”

Progressive: “As a faith community, our call is to accept that we are already accepted by God, and to live a life imitating God’s love.”

So much of the evangelical statement needs to be questioned. So, let’s break it down sentence by sentence.

“Therefore, we want to be a colony of hope reminding the world all of life is sacred and all our fears, failures, and brokenness can be restored and made whole.”

For what it’s worth

I was intrigued by the expression “all of life is sacred,” because it’s not really an evangelical belief unless, of course, it’s an unborn life. When I googled “all of life is sacred,” one of the results that came up is from a website called Bible Gateway. It is a bible study site that seeks to help people understand what they are reading. The passage that included the phrase “all of life is sacred” ironically comes from the story of Noah and the flood. Imagine the irony of that! You know the story, but let’s focus on this section about God’s directive to Noah’s family after the flood.

Genesis 9:  “More than that, do not spill the blood of any human. If anyone spills your blood, I will hold him responsible. It makes no difference whether it is a man or an animal, both will be accountable to Me! If someone murders a fellow human being, then I will require his life in return.  Whoever sheds the blood of a human, that person’s blood will be shed in return by another for God made humanity in His own image. Now all of you, be fruitful and multiply; spread out and populate the earth.”

First off, it was the last verse that struck me as rather humorous. Let’s read between the lines. “Now all six of you, be fruitful and multiply. Oops, I just realized that you’re all members of the same family. Guess I should have included another family. You’ll just have to practice some incest to repopulate the earth and make sure you spread out; we wouldn’t want you to feel crowded.”

It is here that the biblical experts from Bible Gateway inserted their own ideas about what is being said in Genesis 9. This is what they added about the above passage.

“All life is sacred. Human life is especially so. Protecting it is of utmost importance to God. He takes this so seriously and personally because He made humanity to reflect Him. We are His earthly representatives, made in His image. To murder another person is to mount an attack on the One who created him.” Bible Gateway

Here are two points that I find oddly interesting.

First, it seems contradictory to find this sentiment regarding the “sanctity of human life” immediately following the “story” of God destroying nearly the entire human race. It’s as if the Bible Gateway editors are saying, “Never mind what you just read in Genesis 9, even though God just killed millions of men, women and children, protecting human life is “of utmost importance to Him.” However, protecting human life is not something we see a lot throughout the Old Testament. Apparently human life isn’t that much a priority for God.

Second, the Old Testament contains many stories of God directing the Israelites to kill every man, woman, and child in the conquest of the “Promised Land”.  Apparently, non-Jews were not made in God’s image, and it was okay to kill them. Numbers 31: 17&18.

Genocide and a Moral God?

Many people, (me included) point to verses like this throughout the Old Testament as an indication that the god of the Israelites was a barbaric monster. Many of us (rightly so) view genocide as morally objectionable. However, when I googled “Numbers 31” I found a plethora of christian websites justifying genocide. All of them are quite shocking in their defense of this particular case of genocide, but this one is my favorite. It comes from a website called 2BeLikeChrist. If you’re not an evangelical, prepare yourself to be shocked.

The Events

  • As a punishment for intentionally leading Israel into idolatry (Numbers 25), God told Moses to make war with the Midianites.
  • 1,000 soldiers were selected from each of the 12 tribes.
  • They killed all the male citizens,
  • All the women, children, and animals were taken captive before the towns were burned.
  • The Israelites brought the captives to Moses and Eleazar, but Moses became angry with the officers because they spared many of the women who were responsible for enticing the men of Israel into idolatry.
  • Moses told the officers to kill all the captives except the virgin women. (So they could become slaves and raped in the process.)

The Justification

  • This story typically draws an emotion response from readers, but from a purely rational viewpoint there isn’t anything in the story that shows God to be immoral. (Huh?)
  • It’s easy to for us to feel like taking life is morally wrong, but remember, we and God are not in the same position. (Forget about what was said in Genesis 9)
  • Furthermore, if God saves the innocent, which the Bible tells us He does, the Midianite children were being taken out of an immoral world (by killing them) and going to live in Heaven with God.
  • There would have been some pain associated with that journey, (like the pain of being run through by a sword, or having your throat slit, or being beheaded) but pain, in itself, is not morally evil. Consider our practice of poking babies with needles to give them important medicine. It causes the baby momentary pain, (killing them was the momentary pain) but we consider it a long-term good, (because the children got to live in heaven with the god who ordered their murder and the murder of their loved ones. How benign!)

As shocking as this may be for those of us who do not use the bible as our moral compass, justifications like this can be found in great number on Christian websites. But it doesn’t end there. This skewed (and sick) form of morality also has ramifications in our day and age and will be the topic of a future blog.

Now back to our original discussion about how evangelicals view the purpose of their spiritual community.

Evangelical: Our church does not exist for ourselves, but to join God in his redemptive work…

So, here we are back to God’s redemptive work? As we’ve seen before, evangelicals believe that we are all born into sin and are lost and depraved. Therefore, it is their job to get as many people to join the Jesus club as possible. But exactly how do they accomplish that?

Evangelical: …and we see ourselves as agents of God’s Kingdom for the betterment of his world.

I know that Christians want to believe that they are lights on a hill, showing non-believers a better way to live. But, that’s not how non-believers see christians. If you’re a christian and you really want to know how non-believers actually view christians, email me and we can have a conversation.

Evangelical: The church is at its best when it serves, sacrifices, and loves, caring about the things God cares about.

First off, you’ll also notice that this statement, like the rest of their mission statement, isn’t specific about how or who the church serves or how and for whom it sacrifices or who it loves. Nor is it specific about what God cares about. How would they really know what God cares about?

It’s worth noting here that this is the first and only time the word “love” is mentioned in the 1,775-word  evangelical mission statement. In this case it refers to the church’s love. Interestingly enough, “God’s love” is not mentioned even once in either of the evangelical mission statements. Hmmm! This is actually something I found to be common among evangelical churches. For some reason God’s love is rarely mentioned in most evangelical mission statements. Having grown up in an evangelical church, this really surprised me. So much so, that it will be the topic of a future blog project that I’m calling, “What’s love got to do with it?”

Why is “God’s love” noticeably absent from Evangelical mission statements?

Conversely, as we have seen in the progressive mission statement “love” and specifically “God’s love” is mentioned many times. In fact, it’s their major theme. Why is “God’s love” noticeably absent from evangelical mission statements? I reached out to a pastor from the evangelical congregation and asked this very question. I wanted to know if it was an oversight to leave out mentioning God’s love or whether it was by design. He declined to answer and our correspondence ended. No surprise there.

Compare how the progressive congregation views the purpose of their spiritual community.

“As a faith community, our call is to accept that we are already accepted by God, and to live a life imitating God’s love.”

Wow, can it really be that simple? Believe that you are loved by God and love others the way God loves you?

Once again, unless you are an evangelical, this is an easy one.

Point for Progressive! 7-0

 

Coming up next

Social responsibility

Evangelical: We “equip people with vision and tools for joining in God’s redemptive plan. That’s why we are passionate about relieving suffering, fighting injustice, and hold out the gospel as the hope of renewing all things.”

Progressive: “Our starting point in the story of God is that all humans were created in love and for love. There is no hierarchy of value for a human life. But when dehumanization occurs, especially in the form of violence, we must turn again to Christ, who taught us that what we do to the most vulnerable, we have also done unto him. And we must ask for guidance from the Spirit as we critically examine ourselves, our institutions, our beliefs, and our practices which retain and perpetuate expressions of violence against non-white bodies.”

 

 

From Where I Stand

Oct. 22, 2023 

Dale Crum

 

<Previous Post / Next Post >

 

15 Oct, 2023

Blog

Evangelical vs Progressive Christianity

What do they actually believe?

Part six: Spiritual Practices

This is the 6th in a series of blogs where we are comparing the mission statements of an evangelical congregation with that of a progressive congregation. By scrolling down you can find the previous five blogs.

  1. Foundation of Faith
  2. The Trinity
  3. God’s Relationship with Humanity
  4. Nature of Salvation
  5. Humanity’s Relationship With God

They are located below in reverse order (newest to oldest). Feel free to read them in any order you choose, but they might make more sense if you read them in order. For what it’s worth.

Also, I need to interject here that I do not believe in the theology of either congregation. But I do have an opinion about which dogma, or which view of God is healthier for humanity. Once again, what matters here is how each congregation views their… 

Spiritual practices

Evangelical: “We participate in worship, prayer, scripture reading, memorization, sabbath, generosity, silence, solitude, and more because we believe actively training ourselves through healthy spiritual rhythms directs our whole selves toward being formed in the image of our Lord and Rabbi, Jesus.” *

Progressive: “Our mission is… “to do justice, love kindness, and to walk humbly with God.” We believe that when we embody this mission, we will be an extension of God’s welcome in the world.”

Once again, Evangelicals focus on how mankind earns God’s favor. Do they actually believe that by actively participating in these “works” they will become more like Jesus?

Is this really what God requires?

  • to participate in worship
  • prayer
  • scripture reading
  • memorization
  • sabbath
  • generosity
  • silence
  • solitude
  • and more (?)

There is an alternative.

Our mission is… “to do justice, love kindness, and to walk humbly with God.”

The Progressive mission statement comes from Micah 6:6-8.
In verses 6&7 the writer is pondering how he can please God. In verse 8 he realizes what God really wants from him. And it’s simpler than Evangelicals could ever imagine.

6 With what shall I come to the LORD

And bow myself before the God on high?

Shall I come to Him with burnt offerings,

With yearling calves?

7 Does the LORD take delight in thousands of rams,

In ten thousand rivers of oil?

Shall I present my firstborn for my rebellious acts,

The fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?

8 He has told you, O man, what is good;

And what does the LORD require of you

But to do justice, to love kindness,

And to walk humbly with your God?

The differences between these two churches becomes profoundly clear when you read the evangelical mission statement about spiritual practices in the light of Micah 6:6-8.

6 With what shall I come to the LORD?

            And bow myself before the God on high?

            Shall I participate in worship, and prayer?

            With scripture reading?

      7 Does the LORD take delight in thousands of memorized verses?

            In ten years of church attendance?

            Shall I present donations to the church for my rebellious acts?

            My silence, solitude and more for the sins of my soul?

      8 He has told you, O man, what is good;

            And what does the LORD require of you?

            But to actively train yourself, to love spiritual rhythms,

            And to form yourself to the image of your Rabbi?

Evangelicals have this one all wrong… again.

Now, let’s take a look at the “end purpose” of each congregation’s spiritual practices.

Evangelical: “…we believe actively training ourselves through healthy spiritual rhythms directs our whole selves toward being formed in the image of our Lord and Rabbi, Jesus.”

Progressive: “Our mission is… “to do justice, love kindness, and to walk humbly with God.” We believe that when we embody this mission, we will be an extension of God’s welcome in the world.”

No matter what they profess to believe, Evangelicals are once again doing the work by “actively training themselves” to please God. Evangelicals believe that all their “works” will transform them into the image of Jesus. I have no idea what it means to be “formed in the image of Jesus” and I don’t think they do either. It’s a nice, lofty and wonderfully pious thing to say, but how would they know if they’re actually achieving that goal? The vagueness of this statement makes it unmeasurable, unattainable and in a sense, worthless.

In addition, Evangelicals believe that Jesus Christ came to… “sacrifice Himself for all humanity”. Can anybody… has anybody ever lived up to that standard? Admittedly, it’s an honorable and lofty goal, but totally unattainable. If a person believes that Jesus was indeed perfect, then trying to live up to that standard of perfection can only lead to a lifetime of failure… and therapy.

 

 

So, while Evangelicals are trying (like Don Quixote) “to dream the impossible dream”

 

 

 

 

Progressives are striving to be “an extension of God’s welcome in the world”.

That’s a huge difference!

 

 

Point for Progressive: 6-0

End note:

*January 2025: I am currently reading a book about spiritual abuse. The authors say this, “Therefore, a spiritual system to be avoided is one in which the leaders or teachers add the performance of religious behaviors to the performance of Jesus on the cross as a means to find God’s approval. (False teachers say), ‘Faith in Jesus is right, and you must have it. But it is not enough. In order to really find positive standing in God’s eyes, you have to ___________.’” Fill in the blank with whatever fits for your church.

For the evangelical church, they fill in the blank with “participation in worship, prayer, scripture reading, memorization, sabbath, generosity, silence, solitude, and more”.

 

Coming up next:

Purpose of Spiritual Community

Evangelical: Therefore, we want to be a colony of hope reminding the world all of life is sacred and all of our fears, failures, and brokenness can be restored and made whole. Our church does not exist for ourselves, but to join God in his redemptive work… and we see ourselves as agents of God’s Kingdom for the betterment of his world. The church is at its best when it serves, sacrifices, and loves, caring about the things God cares about.

Progressive: As a faith community, our call is to accept that we are already accepted by God, and to live a life imitating God’s love.

 

From Where I Stand

Oct. 15, 2023

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

 

8 Oct, 2023

Blog

Evangelical vs Progressive Christianity

What do they actually believe?

Part five: Humanity’s Relationship With God

This is the 5th in a series of blogs where we are comparing the mission statements of an evangelical congregation with that of a progressive congregation. By scrolling down you can find the previous four blogs.

  1. Foundation of Faith
  2. The Trinity
  3. God’s Relationship with Humanity
  4. Nature of Salvation

They are located below in reverse order (newest to oldest). Feel free to read them in any order you choose, but they might make more sense if you read them in order. For what it’s worth.

Also, I need to interject here that I do not believe in the theology of either congregation. But I do have an opinion about which dogma or which view of God is healthier for humanity. Once again, what matters here is how each congregation views… 

Humanity’s Relationship With God:

Evangelical: “The gospel is hope for healing our relationships with God, others, ourselves, and all creation.  Learning grace is the process of transformation. We are convinced transformation happens by grace as we align our lives with the gospel.”

Progressive: “We cannot create our union with God. It is objectively given. As Father Richard Rohr says, “There’s nothing we can do or not do to increase or decrease God’s love for us.”

So, let’s take a look at what the evangelicals are saying here. Once again, their statement is so vague and so ambiguous, that it causes me to wonder if they actually know what they believe. Read the first part of this statement again.

The gospel is hope for healing our relationships with…

  1. God,
  2. others,
  3. ourselves,
  4. and all creation. *

First off, let’s define “the gospel”. If it’s the source of so much hope and healing, then it would be helpful for us to know exactly what is meant by it.  According to Marriam-Webster the “Gospel” is “the message (or good news) concerning Christ, the kingdom of God, and salvation”.

I can accept that definition but, I’d like to know more specifics about how “the gospel” actually heals our relationships with God, others, ourselves and all creation. For evangelicals, the phrase “the gospel” is like a silver bullet or a panacea.

For what it’s worth

Saying that the gospel can heal our relationship with all creation is a pretty bold statement which is not backed by any further thought or action. In reality it’s a simple and seemingly magical solution to the complicated problem of climate change.

Most conservative evangelicals choose to deny the science surrounding global warming. So, would this statement include healing the world from our (their) neglect? It’s as if evangelicals are saying, “Don’t worry about climate change, the gospel will heal the earth”.  (See endnotes below for more thoughts on this issue.)

Grace?

The second part of evangelicals’ statement is even more interesting.

Evangelical: “Learning grace is the process of transformation. We are convinced transformation happens by grace as we align our lives with the gospel.”

This definitely makes no sense. So, let’s dive deeper into what they are really saying. According to Britannica the definition of Grace in “Christian theology, is the spontaneous, unmerited gift of the divine favor in the salvation of sinners, and the divine influence operating in individuals for their regeneration and sanctification.”

So, let’s focus on two words in the definition; spontaneous and unmerited. So, if “Grace” is spontaneous why do Evangelicals refer to it as a “process of transformation”? In addition, if “Grace” is an unmerited gift, why do we have to earn it by aligning our lives with the gospel? And what exactly does it mean to align our lives with the gospel? That’s not quite clear, is it?

So, I thought if we could perhaps replace some of the key words from the evangelical statement with the actual definitions, the meaning of this statement might be clearer, or not.

Coming to know the spontaneous, unmerited gift of divine favor is the process of a series of actions, or functions that bring about change. We are convinced change happens by the spontaneous, unmerited gift of divine favor as we line up our lives with the message (or good news) concerning Christ, the kingdom of God, and salvation.

That didn’t help much, did it. What is clear, however, is that the Evangelical’s statement is actually saying the exact opposite of what they think they are saying. Once again, evangelicals focus on how man earns God’s favor; “we must align our lives with the gospel”

According to their statement…

Grace is neither spontaneous, nor unmerited.

A healthy alternative

Now, compare all this with the Progressive view of our relationship with God.

Progressive: “We cannot create our union with God. It is objectively given. There’s nothing we can do or not do to increase or decrease God’s love for us.”

Once again, Progressives focus on God’s love, (something evangelicals have yet to do). For Progressives God’s love is not spontaneous, because it has always been there and will always be there, yet it is indeed unmerited and unconditional. It seems to me that this is a better way to live.

“There is nothing we can do or not do to increase or decrease God’s love for us.”

Point for Progressive! 5-0

 

Coming up next, we will be looking at…

Spiritual practices

Evangelical: We participate in worship, prayer, scripture reading, memorization, sabbath, generosity, silence, solitude, and more because we believe actively training ourselves through healthy spiritual rhythms directs our whole selves toward being formed in the image of our Lord and Rabbi, Jesus.

Progressive: Our mission is… “to do justice, love kindness, and to walk humbly with God.” We believe that when we embody this mission, we will be an extension of God’s welcome in the world.

End note: Christians and Climate Change

Bob Inglis was a conservative congressman from NC who, after joining a junket to Antarctica and seeing for himself the truth behind the science of global warming, decided that it was his christian duty to speak out for the stewardship of taking better care of this earth. His conservative constituents disagreed and voted him out of office by a landslide.

Merchants of Doubt: A documentary that looks at pundits-for-hire who present themselves as scientific authorities as they speak about topics like toxic chemicals, pharmaceuticals and climate change.

Biologos:  Why Should Christians Care for Creation? “As bearers of God’s image, all people have the responsibility and privilege of caring for God’s creation.”

 

 

From Where I Stand

Oct. 8, 2023

Dale Crum

 

<Previous Post / Next Post >

 

 

1 Oct, 2023

Blog

Evangelical vs Progressive Christianity

What do they actually believe?

Part four: The Nature of Salvation

This is the 4th in a series of blogs where we are comparing the mission statements of an evangelical congregation with that of a progressive congregation. By scrolling down you can find the previous three blogs

  1. Foundation of Faith
  2. The Trinity
  3. God’s Relationship with Humanity

They are located below in reverse order (newest to oldest). Feel free to read them in any order you choose, but they might make more sense if you read them in order. For what it’s worth.

Also, I need to interject here that I do not believe in the theology of either congregation. But I do have an opinion about which dogma or which view of God is healthier for humanity. Once again, what matters here is how each congregation views the… 

Nature of Salvation:

Evangelical: “We believe that salvation from the guilt and condemnation of sin is possible only as the gift of God’s grace and that whoever by faith receives Jesus Christ as His Savior becomes a child of God. His salvation is not the result of any human effort or merit, rather it is the work which Christ accomplished through his life, death, burial, and resurrection that purchases salvation.”

Progressive: “The teachings of Jesus have led us to see ourselves as Christo-centric universalists, believing that Christ died for all the world and God’s love is accessible and available to everyone, everywhere. The embrace of God is an inclusive, unstoppable love that calls us to believe and bear witness to the belovedness of every human being. We believe that we belong to God long before, or even if we never believe in God. God’s love is eternal, always welcoming, and does not require any transaction on our part.”

The interesting point about how each congregation views “Salvation” is how they view the very nature of God. Let’s start with the evangelical view.

Evangelical: “We believe that salvation from the guilt and condemnation of sin is possible only as the gift of God’s grace and that whoever by faith receives Jesus Christ as His Savior becomes a child of God.”

Once again, Evangelicals’ starting point is “guilt and condemnation”. Even though Evangelicals say that our salvation is not a result of any human effort, something must be done to access that salvation. One must “accept Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior”, (P.L.A.S.) or in less wordy terms, one must join the Jesus club. It is then, and only then, that one becomes “a child of God”.

Evangelical: “His salvation is not the result of any human effort or merit, rather it is the work which Christ accomplished through his life, death, burial, and resurrection that purchases salvation.”

Even though evangelicals maintain, “salvation is not a result of human effort or merit”, there is much that the “children of God” must do to stay in God’s good graces. I pulled the following two statements from other evangelical websites. From these you can clearly see that even after salvation there continues to be “works” on our part in order remain in God’s good graces.

What is required to receive God’s grace?

To “continue in” or “abide in” the Savior’s love means to receive His grace and be perfected by it. To receive His grace, we must have faith in Jesus Christ and keep His commandments, including repenting of our sins, being baptized for the remission of sins, receiving the Holy Ghost, and continuing in the path of obedience.

So, according to evangelicals we must…

  1. have faith in Jesus Christ (for what is not clear)
  2. keep His commandments (all of them, including those in the Old Testament)
  3. repent of our sins (on a daily basis)
  4. be baptized for the remission of sins (yet another transaction to perform)
  5. receive the Holy Ghost, (apparently it’s not included in the receiving part) and
  6. continue in the path of obedience. (a never ending list of ways to fail)

Remember that phrase “whoever by faith receives Jesus Christ as His Savior becomes a child of God”? Well, according to other evangelicals, someone might call themselves a child of God, but they’re really just adopted, (like a red-haired stepchild).

And our being called the children of God as an expression of the incredible love of God is grounded in our adoption. We are not by nature children of God. Only by adoption are we regarded as the children of God. Because of the Father’s love for Christ, the Father has adopted us into the royal family, making us joint heirs with Christ. We are beloved of the Father because Jesus is beloved of the Father, and we ought never to forget that.

For what it’s worth

If you read the blog about the trinity you will remember that evangelicals say that the three parts of the trinity “are identical in essence and equal in power and glory; they possess the same nature, attributes, and perfections” and existed before creation. If all parts of the trinity really are equal and there is only one god than the above statement should read as follows.

“Because of God’s love for himself, God has adopted us into the royal family, making us joint heirs with himself. We are beloved of God because God is beloved of himself, and we ought never to forget that.”

Simply stated, this means that a select few are the precarious benefactors of God’s love for himself, and they ought not forget that. What a mind game!

Compare that with how progressives view the nature of Salvation.

Progressive: “The teachings of Jesus have led us to see ourselves as Christo-centric universalists, believing that Christ died for all the world and God’s love is accessible and available to everyone, everywhere. The embrace of God is an inclusive, unstoppable love that calls us to believe and bear witness to the belovedness of every human being. We believe that we belong to God long before, or even if we never believe in God. God’s love is eternal, always welcoming, and does not require any transaction on our part.”

For Progressives, one doesn’t become a child of God by joining the Jesus club, everyone already is a beloved child of God… (not by adoption) and there is no need to join the exclusive Jesus club.

We are already embraced and beloved by God. No transaction is required.

Progressives mention God’s love four times in their 88-word statement, while the evangelicals have yet to mentioned a loving God in any of theirs.

Therefore, I award another Point for Progressive 4-0.

Coming up next: Man’s Relationship with God

Evangelical: The gospel is hope for healing our relationships with God, others, ourselves, and all creation.  Learning grace is the process of transformation. We are convinced transformation happens by grace as we align our lives with the gospel.

Progressive: We cannot create our union with God. It is objectively given. As Father Richard Rohr says, “There’s nothing we can do or not do to increase or decrease God’s love for us.”

 

From Where I Stand

Oct. 1, 2023

Dale Crum

 

<Previous Post / Next Post >