I was hoping for a few more responses in part 1, but that’s the nature of blogging, I suppose. Sometimes you get action on a post, sometimes you don’t.I think I could develop a more thorough post on an idea here – but I’m going to just cut to the chase.
Like Curtis, I would like for all people (not just homosexuals) to "acknowledge [our sinful lifestyles] and have a 100% desire to change." Personally, I’m just not sure I can require that for membership. And I’m not sure how high of a number I can give.
Here’s why: No matter what number I come up with for this hypothetical dilemma, I know that there are sins in my life for which I experience an even lower level of conviction. I tend to take other people’s sins more seriously than I take my own.
Stupid plank.
Posts
7 comments:
you are like a good preacher always stepping on our toes. Ouch!
I believe there is a difference in "judging" (I don't like that term) a person's fruit and judging them with condemnation. Jesus commanded us to judge a person's fruit. Paul commanded the Corinthians and Timothy to exlude unrepentant members. I don't believe we should do this self-righteously or unlovingly, but I believe WE MUST. If we don't, we are living in disobedience.
-The Notorious Zeb Balentine
Notorious Zeb,
I love it that you participate in dialogue and I agree with your comment here.
But I'm still not sure how we define "unrepentant members." Clearly there are some people who should not be members of our church and there are others already inside that need to experience loving church discipline (including the possibility of removing them from membership).
But our discussion seems to assume that there are only two categories of people: (1) those who are convicted by and repenting from their sins and (2) those who are not convicted by and repenting from their sins.
I think the reality is conviction (like many things in life) is better seen as existing on a continuum rather than as two categories. Sometimes we are all more or less convicted, are we not? Sometimes we are all more or less committed to becoming more like Christ, are we not? Is there anyone who could honestly say they are 100% committed to abandoning every single one of their sins?
I think not. So we all fall short of 100%. The original question (as unfair, unrealistic, and contrived as it is) remains. What percentage is acceptable? How do we define an "unrepentant member?" And to connect the discussion to our class topic - do we have different standards for different people with different sins?
These are really tough questions. I don't think I have an answer for them at this point. I am a firm believer in the need and command for Church discipline, but it is the grey areas that still give me a head ache trying to figure them out.
-Z Diddy on the Flip side
in answer to your question "do we have different standards for different people with different sins?" - i think, too often, we do. and i think homosexuality is one of those sins that we deem to be worst of all. we reach out to the alcoholic or drug addict and try to get them help. we offer counsel to those who have been out of church for years, or have gambling problems, or unruly teens who have gone off the deep end. but, we tend to avoid homosexuals. we see it as unforgivable or beyond help - like the worst of all possible sins. i know i always felt this way until i found out several good friends from my past were gay. then, it changed my entire view of homosexuality. it is a sin, no doubt. but, i sin too. and i feel like we can embrace these people and love them as people, without embracing their sin. now....the whole joining a body of believers question....no clue on that one.
In regards to this question of percentages, I would say none, not 0% , but no percentage at all. First, I know this has already been addressed, but How exactly DO we measure the percentage of conviction (right now I'm feeling 99.9% about pride, but only a 2.53 on drunkeness, well I'll round up, maybe a 3). Second, I believe one needs to first really dig, really ask, and really listen to all opinions on this subject: Is homosexuality wrong? You will probably have the same conclusion, but I believe people (christian or not) tend to either grow up with the queers are weird mentality or maybe they read Romans 1 once and something about gays dying in the OT. Third hang out with some homosexuals has been my advice to others (and I know Zeb has done both of these things, so dont go defense on me dude), my perception of homosexuals in the church changed when I became close friends with three different homosexuals. Fourth, I don't think we should fret over church membership so much , that it is a deciding factor in who we will fellowship with as Christians, Christ was not like "hey you guys come up to the mount, I'm preaching, then if your squaky clean you can join the First Baptist of Galillee. I am not saying that church discipline is a bad theory, I am just saying that the humble, loving practice of it has to be done carefully, and in the hands of a competent, and servant leader. (kinda like communism, good theory with bad practice haha).
So that was a jumbled mess, so here is what I believe in a nutshell:
1. Gay is not necessarily bad, but we are not necessarily good.
2. You cannot measure conviction.
3. Study homosexuality.
4.Love homosexuals, and have a relationship with them.
Cox
it is vitally important to remember that paul was using excluding people from fellowship (not membership) as a tool toward repentance. the goal is always restoration. in fact, in the next book over, he said to restore the brother who had been put out of fellowship.
(of course i wont get bogged down in the debate of whether that was the same person. the point is, he was restoring someone to fellowship.)
peace out yo
Post a Comment