A Shout Out to My Friends at First Presbyterian, Enid, and Pastor Roy Schneider

First Presbyterian Church in Enid, Oklahoma voted yesterday on whether or not members wished to remain a part of the denomination Presbyterian USA. PCUSA claims to have 2.3 million members in all 50 states, but on May 10, 2011, PCUSA joined a long line of mainline denominations in approving the ordination of gays and homosexuals to be pastors within the denomination. Most of the people at First Presbyterian, Enid, and all of my friends at that church were opposed to the denomination's decision to ordain homosexuals.  Yesterday, First Presbyterian, Enid's membership voted 65% to 35% to leave  the PCUSA denomination.

Here's what that means. Unlike independent, autonomous Baptist churches like the church I pastor (Emmanuel Baptist Church, Enid, Oklahoma), the church members of the non-profit church called First Presbyterian, Enid do not own the buildings (valued in the millions). Neither do the members of First Presbyterian, Enid own the church endowment funds (estimated at $4 million dollars). The denomination owns all the assets. So, even though the members of the church paid for their buildings, gave money to the church's endowment, and have financially supported the church over the more than 100 years of the church's existence, the members who choose to leave First Presbyterian, Enid go without any assets. Further, if Pastor Roy Schneider leaves the denomination, which might happen due to his biblical faith-based convictions, Pastor Schneider will forfeit his retirement account.

Wow. In Enid, Oklahoma there are Christians who cherish the Bible more than the church buildings. There are Christians who are more concerned about their principles than their pocketbooks. Enid, Oklahoma has some Christians who value what God says more than what any denominational leaders say. Those are, in my opinion, the kind of Christians that ultimately make a difference in this world. Kudos to the people of First Presbyterian Church, Enid, Oklahoma. If you start another church, we will support you in any way possible. If you need a church home, our church would welcome with open arms people like you who love Christ and His Word.

And, if nothing else, the issues in PCUSA remind me why I'm glad I'm in a church system that is congregational in polity, autonomous in governance, and ultimately free and independent of any silly and unbiblical decisions of denominational authorities. In other words, the Southern Baptist Convention owns neither the buildings, endowments, or financial assets of Emmanuel Baptist Church, Enid.

That's the way it ought to be.

"My Kingdom Is Not of this World": New York's Law Recognizing Gay Marriage

By now I'm sure you have heard that the state of New York has decided to make gay marriages legal. New York's State Senate passed a bill over the weekend, and New York's Governor has said he’ll sign it. New York is set to become the sixth state to legalize gay marriage.

Some Christians are distraught over this proposed law. It is evidence, say these Christians, that the United States is continuing its cultural and moral decline. Without doubt, the United States is changing. But unlike some of my Christian friends the new law causes me no distress. I am unconcerned with New York's proposed new law not because I believe gay marriage is of God. On the contrary, I believe the Bible teaches the Creator never sanctions homosexuality. The reason I am not distressed with a continuing movement of states toward recognizing gay marriage is because the kingdom of Christ has nothing to do with a political entity, including nations and states.

Dee over at Wartburg Watch has pointed my attention to an amazing quote by the erudite Christian thinker C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity. C.S. Lewis wrote:

"There ought to be two distinct kinds of marriage: one governed by the State with rules enforced on all citizens, the other governed by the Church with rules enforced by her on her own members. The distinction ought to be quite sharp, so that a man knows which couples are married in a Christian sense and which are not.”

C.S. Lewis

I realize that some who wish to marry a person of the same sex will consider themselves Christians and believe themselves to be under the approbation and favor of God. The Bible, however, is quite clear, not just in specific passages but throughout the sacred text, that same sex unions are disapproved by God (i.e. God calls homosexuality "sin"), and unless God by His grace grants the homosexual repentance, the homosexual--like the adulterer, the thief, the pedophile, the liar, etc...-- will find himself facing the wrath of God upon death.

The issue in C.S. Lewis' day was divorce. Some Christians were very upset that the government was making it "easier" for men and women to divorce one another. C.S. Lewis wrote:

"Before leaving the question of divorce, I should like to distinguish two things which are very often confused. The Christian conception of marriage is one: the other is the quite different question — how far Christians, if they are voters or Members of Parliament, ought to try to force their views of marriage on the rest of the community by embodying them in the divorce laws. 

A great many people seem to think that if you are a Christian yourself you should try to make divorce difficult for every one. I do not think that. At least I know I should be very angry if the Mahommedans tried to prevent the rest of us from drinking wine. My own view is that the Churches should frankly recognise that the majority of the British people are not Christians and, therefore, cannot be expected to live Christian lives."

The problem with political liberals and political conservatives who happen to be Christian is that they confuse the church with the state and vice-versa. Christ said, "My kingdom is NOT of this world" and the sooner His followers realize this, the less angry we Christians will be when the political world moves in directions opposite of the principles of Scripture. It doesn't mean we don't participate in the political process, it just means as C.S. Lewis brilliantly pointed out, that we cannot expect the majority of people in America to live Christian lives, for the majority of people in America may not even know the Christ of whom we speak.

Militant Homosexuals: Loving Them to Christ Without Lambasting Them at Church

In November of 2002 I was elected President of the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma. A militant group of homosexuals and lesbians in Oklahoma called SoulForce had been picketing SBC churches on Sunday during worship services, attempting to intimidate church members and disrupt services. These pickets were drawing a great deal of publicity. SoulForce leaders stated their goal was"to change the hearts and minds of religious leaders who engage in anti-homosexual campaigns." SoulForce turned their attention toward me and my church when I was elected President of the BGCO.

SoulForce had listened to my exposition of Romans 1:22-28 and discovered that I believe those who give a vociferous defense of lesbian and homosexual sexual activity as conduct that is approved by God--similar to people who give a defense of adulterous, pedophilic or other sexually deviant behaviors as conduct approved by God--are giving evidence of 'reprobation.' A reprobate, by the definition of the word, means"one disapproved by God."  The actual Latin word was used in the Roman market place for the testing of precious metals. A "reprobate" metal was not approved as genuine and therefore not accepted. In a similar manner God declares as reprobate any sinner who continually embraces as normal and moral that behavior which God categorically calls abnormal and immoral.

Here is where it gets a little tricky for some. The question is not whether or not a sinner who struggles with same sex attraction and/or homosexual or lesbian sexual behavior can become a Christian. The most militant homosexual or lesbian can be redeemed by God for the gospel is all about God making the disapproved approved. Our just God is the justifier of the ungodly.  God performs the work of removing sinners from their state of reprobation through the work of His Son and His Spirit. It is God who justifies sinners, never sinners who justify themselves. This is why Paul instructed Christians to "examine . . . prove . . . and know . . . lest ye be reprobates" (II Corinthians 13:5). "Examine ... prove .. and know" are active words that direct us to a passive work. God saves. We examine to ensure that He has saved us. The question at hand is whether or not a Christian can continue to call his homosexual sexual behavior "approved by God."

The Evidence of God's Saving Grace

What is the evidence of God's grace?  The Bible identifies three major indicators that God has chosen to deliver us from a state of  just condemnation into a state of gracious approbation: (1). Faith in Jesus Christ. We come to believe that God has obtained our deliverance from condemnation at the cross. Our faith in Christ also happens to be a gift from Christ, for He is the author and finisher of our faith (see Hebrews 12:2). Our faith is NOT the basis of our salvation, it is the evidence of our salvation. God saves. We believe God has saved us. (2). Hope that those sins in our lives which required God to place His Son on the cross are being progressively removed from us by the power of the Holy Spirit and God's work of sanctification within us. The first indication we possess this hope is our ability to say "I have indeed sinned against God."  For without being able to call sin what God calls sin, there is no hope (or desire) for those sins to be removed from us. (3). Love for others. This "love,"--unconditional, personal, agape love--is the distinguishing mark of true Christianity (see I Cor. 13; John 13:35).

For the one who finds himself attracted to same sex sexual relationships, the evidence of God's grace is not the complete absence of homosexual sexual desires and/or behavior in the justified sinner, but the internal attitude of the justified sinner toward his tendencies of desire for and participation in homosexual behavior. The same could be said of the justified sinner who struggles with other sexual sins, addictions, and moral transgressions. Though God's grace finishes the condemnation of our sins for us, it only begins the battle over our sins in us.

I believe that the leaders of SoulForce, unless changed by God's grace, will die in a state of reprobation. They actively and aggressively approve of that which God disapproves. Yet I can no more change their minds about the appropriateness of their homosexual and lesbian sexual conduct than a man by sheer will or moral persuasion can rocket others to the moon. There is an inability in a reprobate that requires God's grace and goodness to remove. I am simply called, as a recipient of His grace, to love those in need of His grace. In other words, the grace of God is to be seen and felt by sinners through the graciousness of God's people. That's easy for me. How can I condemn the man living in an unreprentant homosexual lifestyle when my own sins would also justly condemn me were it not for God's saving grace?

When I became President of the BGCO my views on homosexuality didn't change. They still haven't. The only thing that changed is how people perceived me. In SoulForce's case I was now a "religious leader" that they could target for "a change of heart and mind" regarding my anti-homosexuality. Do you find it fascinating that militant homosexuals (or adulterers, or other sexually immoral people)--apart from the saving grace of God--press to change the hearts and minds of born-again Christians by aggressively confronting us? The only way we could ever agree with them about homosexuality would be if God removed from us His saving grace "which changes our hearts and minds" about sin. Ironically, if the militant homosexuals came to experience God's saving grace a "change of heart and mind" would be the precise thing that would come to them. But you can't yell at people, scream at people, or condemn people without grace--for such were you. We are to love them to Christ without lambasting them at church.

The Meeting with the Militant Homosexual Organization


As soon as I was elected BGCO President SoulForce asked  me to meet with them. SoulForce's previous requests for a meeting with the BGCO President had been denied. To the surprise of SoulForce, I agreed. I told them they could pick the time and the place and I would travel to meet with them. I only asked that Vice-President Buddy Hunt, a friend and fellow pastor, be allowed to accompany me. They agreed.

We met in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The executive officers of SoulForce included three women and two men. Buddy and I arrived and we introduced ourselves to those present. There was some coffee and the seven of us gathered around a table and visited for a while. I won't mention the names of the five from SoulForce who were present, but I spent several minutes asking personal questions about the background, families and careers of each one. I learned that one of the ladies had 'discovered she was a lesbian' while attending Oklahoma Baptist University, and she was instrumental in starting a a gay/lesbian support group on the campus of OBU in the 1970's. I listened patiently and earnestly, never interrupting any of the stories I heard except maybe to ask another personal question formed out of my own interest. The get acquainted time was genuine, not forced. I learned of some mutual friends that we shared and was delighted to be able to converse on a personal level. I think my interest in their lives caught them completely off-guard.

Then, SoulForce got down to business. They asked me my views on homosexuality. I spoke clearly, articulating what I believe the Bible teaches, laying out for them in a calm and steady voice what I have written above. When I finished one of the men began to question me if I believed he would be going to hell because he was sexually involved with another man. I patiently explained that the Bible teaches hell is God's just judgment for sin, and unless Christ died and atoned for his sins, he would be experiencing God's just judgment in hell. He said he did not believe it was sin for a man to have sex with another man. He went on to say that what would be sin for him would be violating his vows of sexual fidelity to the male lover with whom he had chosen to be in union. In other words, sex with multiple men was sin to him, not sex with one man.

He told me about reading "Batman and Robin" when he was just a boy, and knowing that he would one day be Robin to his own personal Batman. When he was in college he met his personal Batman. His male lover became his spouse. The SoulForce leader explained to me that he now loved this man more than life itself. This relationship that had brought him so much happiness, so much comfort, and so much security was the very thing that Southern Baptist pastors were saying would send him to hell. Amazingly, this man began to weep as he spoke to me. I sat silently as the man attempted to regain his composure. He then went on to explain that his lover was very ill, possibly dying. He hated Southern Baptists because we condemned people like him and his lover to hell.

Loving the Homosexual Who Hated Southern Baptists

Some of my Southern Baptist pastor friends might ridicule me for what I did next, but bear with me, there is an amazing end to the story.

I asked the homosexual man if I could pray for him and his lover. Puzzled, the group of five from SoulForce asked me "Pray for what?" I said I wanted to pray for the physical healing of this man's lover. I then stood and asked them if we could hold hands. As we joined hands in a circle I asked the Great Physician to bring healing to my new friend's lover. I prayed that God would grant mercy and grace to raise him from his sick bed and allow the restoration of his health. I was specific in my prayer, and it was similar to the requests I have made of the Lord during hundreds of hospital visitations. When I said "Amen" we all sat down in silence.

Emmanuel, Enid

For a while, nobody said anything. Then the President of SoulForce said, "Wade, we wanted to meet with you today because we know your views on homosexuality. It is our intention, if we cannot change your mind about homosexuality, to inform you that we will picket  your church every Sunday as long as you are President of the BGCO."

I explained that they were welcome to picket our church, and that if their members were driving a long distance to come, we would provide a meal for them after church. In addition, if SoulForce intended to picket after the evening service and wished to remain overnight, I was positive we could provide for them some accomodations.

They sat with their mouths agape.

Finally, the Vice-President of SoulForce said, "But we don't think you understand. We will be shouting, holding signs, demonstrating against what we believe is "homophopia" in the Southern Baptist Convention. We don't think you will like us coming."

I said, "Look, I have already spent an hour visiting with you, and not only do I like you as people, I love you enough to pray for you the way I pray for my own church family. If you are coming to picket Emmanuel, we will welcome you with open arms. You are my friends. Do what you feel led to do. I can't speak for my entire congregation, but I've been pastor at Emmanuel long enough to know that most of them, and I would hope all of them, would respond the way I am. You are welcome to picket our church. Know that not only are we not afraid of you, we love you."

Astonishment filled the room.

The Million Dollar Question

I was then asked the following question: "Don't you wish to convince us that what you have said about homosexuality is right and what we are saying is wrong?"

I then said, "To be candid, I don't think I am the one with the agenda. You asked me to meet. You have stated it is your desire to change my mind. You are planning on picketing the church I pastor to convince our people that we are homophobic. My only agenda is to get to know you and to love you. If you ask me what I believe about homosexuality, which you did earlier in our meeting, I will tell you. But it is beyond my ability to convince you that what I am saying is true. Only God can convince you that what feels so right to you is in reality disapproved of by Him. I am simply called by Heavenly Father to love you where you are and that is precisely what I intend to do."

It was very quiet for what seemed like a long time. The five from SoulForce looked at each other and then one of them shrugged as if to say, "We are not really sure what to do next." The discussion turned toward the possibility of a future meeting, and I told them I would be happy to meet again if they would like.

We stood and Buddy and I personally hugged all five of them and then we suggested we close in prayer. I prayed for each of the men and women by name and for the Lord's blessings on their lives. I acknowledged our differences of belief, but I prayed that our new friends might feel and experience the love of God through Buddy and me. I further prayed that to whatever extent our Southern Baptist Convention practiced homophobia and minimized the deep internal struggle in the hearts of those who felt themselves created by God as a homosexual or lesbian, that God would wake us Southern Baptists to the reality that His kingdom is only expanded by speaking the truth in love, and that truth without love is in reality no truth at all.

My prayer was closed with a hearty round of "Amens." I later received three very cordial letters of thanks from individuals who attended that the SoulForce meeting.

The Rest of the Story

Emmanuel, Enid was never picketed by SoulForce during my entire two years of service as President of the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma.

In June of 2004 Buddy Hunt and I were walking together outside the Convention Hall at the Southern Baptist Convention in Indianapolis, Indiana. SoulForce was picketing the SBC. It was a very large protest and people were shouting at SBC messengers as they crossed the street to enter the Convention Hall. All of the sudden, I head my name shouted loudly. Not once, but several times. I looked over at the protestors and saw our five SoulForce friends from Oklahoma. Buddy and I went over to where they were and gave them all warm greetings and hugs. All the protestors grew silent as they watched two SBC pastors with messenger tags on their suit coats converse with the five leaders of the SoulForce Oklahoma outside the Southern Baptist Convention. During the entire ten minutes we spoke with one another, there was no protesting taking place. Buddy and I later laughed at what SBC pastors must have thought when they saw us being hailed and called over by the group that had staged multiple protests at the SBC. It was in Indianapolis that I saw the power of actually loving militant homosexuals. We are really good at passing resolutions of condemnation against homosexuality, but it was at Indianopolis I saw the results of actually accepting the homosexual.  I don't believe my five homosexual friends have yet come to faith in Christ, but I know that God may very well use my goodness and kindness to them to help them understand the grace of Christianity.

I offer this post as a response to some of my fellow Southern Baptist pastors who have gone ballistic over Dr. Al Mohler's comments regarding homosexuality at the 2011 Southern Baptist Convention in Phoenix, Arizona. Dr. Mohler had the audacity to propose that Southern Baptists have practiced a form of homophobia and have often "lied" about homosexuality by using the language of "choice" without acknowledging the deeper internal conflict (the sin nature) at work within. Dr. Mohler believes we could do more to love militant homosexuals while we share the gospel with the world. I agree with Dr. Mohler.

I also think that those SBC pastors who disagree with Mohler's views have never attempted to love a militant homosexual to Christ. If I'm wrong, I'd like to hear how they've done it. I know Dr. Mohler has ministered to militant homosexuals. I know I have. I would much rather be in a Convention where pastors actually love the sinner while speaking the truth in love than where pastors hate the sinner while shouting the truth in anger. 

God closed the mouths of the carnivores in Daniel's den millenia ago. I sometimes wish God would staple shut the mouths of certain SBC pastors today until they actually demonstrate love to people in need of God's grace. If we would be as concerned with practicing the gospel of grace as we are preaching the gospel of grace, we might be surprised what God does in the lives of those who consider us their enemies.

To Some Southern Baptist Preachers Jesus Is Just Another Southern Baptist Preacher

Some Southern Baptist pastors have created an image of Jesus that is purely cultural. Jesus is a white male who loves grits, buttermilk and cornbread. He eschews beer with the boys, but he loves Nascar and football. He's in church on Sunday morning and night, visitation on Monday night, and prayer meeting on Wednesday night. He gives ten percent of his income to the church, and refuses to be friends with any church member who doesn't. He's a card carrying member of the National Rifle Association. He hates homosexuality (homos) more than he does adultery (people who have an 'affair'). He is silent about obesity caused by the overindulgence of food but loudly condemns anybody who even thinks of drinking one glass of wine. He speaks with sappy spiritual sentimentality about loving the world, but he is quick to grab a microphone and loudly condemn any person who doesn't see the world like he does.  He wants everyone to look like him, act like him, talk like him, be like him. In short, Jesus is a  Southern Baptist pastor to many Southern Baptist pastors.

We have lost any concept of the transcendence of God. Transcendence is defined as "a state of being or existence above and beyond the limits of material experience."  Jesus is, by virtue of His personhood, way beyond our experience. When we try to mold Jesus into our image, we get a "holy" and "righteous" anger with fellow pastors who don't look like us.

Some fellow Southern Baptist pastors are trying to make an issue of Al Mohler's statement that Southern Baptists have "lied" about the nature of homosexuality and have practiced "homophobia" (fear of homosexuals) in years past. These Southern Baptist pastors are in a frenzy (see here and here). What is absolutely absurd about this entire situation is that Dr. Al Mohler has written over 200 articles clearly detailing a sound, biblical view of homosexuality, and even has gone on Larry King to stand for biblical truth. The disagreement going on is not over whether or not homosexuality is sin (the Bible is clear that it is), but how Southern Baptists should relate to sinners who struggle with the sin of homosexuality. Those Southern Baptist pastors who see Jesus as a Southern Baptist pastor are demanding Al Mohler explain how Southern Baptists have lied about homosexuality and how Southern Baptists have been homophobic.

Dr. Mohler is capable of answering for himself, but allow me to point out just one example of homophobia in Southern Baptist circles. In 1992 the Southern Baptist Convention  changed Article III of the SBC Constitution (change is emboldened).

------------------------
Article III. Membership: The Convention shall consist of messengers who are members of missionary Baptist churches cooperating with the Convention as follows:
 1. One (1) messenger from each church which: (1) Is in friendly cooperation with the Convention and sympathetic with its purposes and work. Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse homosexual behavior.
2. One (1) additional messenger from each such church for every two hundred and fifty (250) members; or for each $250.00 paid to the work of the Convention during the fiscal year preceding the annual meeting.
3. The messengers shall be appointed and certified by the churches to the Convention, but no church may appoint more than ten .
4. Each messenger shall be a member of the church by which he is appointed.
--------------------------------
 
Do you see the homophobia? The issue of homosexuality becomes the defining factor of whether or not a church is in cooperation with the SBC. Why did we not change the consitution to say the following?

Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse adulterous behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse pedophilic behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse gluttonous behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse drunkenness behavor.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse addictive behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse arrogant behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse gossiping behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse hateful behavior.
 
We all are in need of a Savior. Yes, homosexuals fight hard to try to convince themselves their actions are not sin. So too do gossips. So too do the proud. So too do adulterers. So too do gluttons.
 
Oh well. You get the picture. Why the homophobia? The problem we have right now in the Southern Baptist Convention is Southern Baptist preachers who honestly believe that Jesus would never sit down with a militant homosexual and have a cordial conservation with him over dinner (think Zacchaeus), or that Jesus would ever care to be in the presence of a loud-mouth radical lesbian who is known throughout the city for her activism much less offer to help the lesbian with repairs on her home or pay for her groceries (think woman at the well), or that Jesus would ever go to the homes of homosexuals and open the Scriptures and teach them about Himself. They don't think Jesus would EVER do that because THEY would never do that. This kind of legalism becomes the death knell of any spiritual vitality in the Southern Baptist Convention.

Jesus is not just another Southern Baptist preacher. Thank God He is not, and thank God He is God. Maybe Al Mohler has caught a glimpse of Jesus in ways his critics have not.

Al Mohler Publicly and Verbally Spanks Peter Lumpkins at the 2011 SBC in Phoenix, Arizona

Very few people know that former Southern Baptist Convention pastor Peter Lumpkins has taken to his blog to attempt to personally denigrate and shame a fellow Southern Baptist pastor named Jonathan Merritt for being "soft on homosexuality." Now they do. Peter Lumpkins attempted to humiliate Jonathan Merritt and Al Mohler on this very issue at the 2011 Southern Baptist Convention in Phoenix, Arizona. Merritt, son of former SBC President James Merritt, has written that Southern Baptists could do more to minister to homosexuals rather than simply condemning them. Peter Lumpkins has taken exception to Merritt's statements. What has particular drawn Lumpkins' ire is an article that Jonathan Merritt wrote where he interviewed  Southern Seminary President Al Mohler.

In that interview Jonathan Merritt quoted Al Mohler as saying to him, "We've (Southern Baptists) lied about the nature of homosexuality and have practiced what can only be described as homophobia... We've used the choice language when it is clear that sexual orientation is a deep inner struggle and not merely a matter of choice."

After Al Mohler made his Southern Seminary report at the SBC in Phoenix, Peter Lumpkins grabbed a microphone and publicly addressed the Southern Baptist Convention at 4:30 p.m. Pacific Time to try to trap Southern Seminary President Al Mohler and embarrass Jonathan Merritt. Lumpkins went into a five minute tiff over Al Mohler's "alleged" quotes (see above).

Mr. Lumpkins said to Mohler, "I am interested if in fact these words were spoken by you in the interview. If so, how have Southern Baptists lied? How have we practiced homophobia? If not, has Jonathan Merritt lied?"  Does anybody else find it strange that Peter has the answers to these questions, given to him privately by Jonathan Merrit himself, but Peter insists on making the issue "public?" The only reason Peter would try to trap Mohler and shame Merritt is because he doesn't like what Merritt and Mohler have said about ministry to homosexuals, and in Peter's narrow framework, "if you don't think like I do, you are not legitimate Southern Baptist!"

The President of the SBC interrupted Lumpkins as he was speaking and told him that he had spent all his alloted time to speak. The President then called upon Al Mohler to respond.

Mohler left no room for any misunderstanding. "I made those statements. They are not alleged statements. I made them. "

He went on to say, "When I was asked that question, I believe then and now, that we are to speak the truth about homosexuality, but we are also called to minister to even militant groups of homosexuals. The reality is that we as Christian churches have not done well on this issue. If we do not admit that it is to our shame."

Mohler went on to explain how Southern Baptists have been homophobic. His words were riveting, his passion was clearly for the gospel of Jesus Christ and the mission of seeing homosexuals converted, and when he was through the convention gave loud applause.

He verbally spanked Peter Lumpkins for his question. And well he should.

Peter Lumpkins and his ilk (Fundamentalists with a capital F) take pride in attempting to publicly humiliate men like Al Mohler and Jonathan Merritt because of theological or philosophical differences. It is because of the critical and harsh spirits legalists possess, demonstrated today at the Southern Baptist Convention, that young pastors flock from the SBC instead of toward the SBC.

The best thing that can be said of the 2011 Southern Baptist Convention is that at least one legalistic, shame-filled attack by Fundamentalists who are killing any future growth of the SBC was emphatically put down by an erudite theologian with a round of applause from convention messengers.

May it continue to happen.

Hang in there Jonathan Merritt. Southern Baptists need pastors like you. Critics may be loud, persistent, and sometimes irritating, but thankfully, they represent a minority view in the SBC. Were they to ever be a majority, I would join you in leaving.

When One's Definition of Sin Becomes Relevant, One's Dying to Sin Becomes Irrelevant

Our church hosts weekly meetings for people who are struggling to handle the pain their addictions to certain activities brings them. We are a host church that practices love and grace to all those who darken our doors, accepting the sinner wherever he or she is in life. We teach those who come to our recovery and restoration ministries how the greatest pleasures in this life come from our personal relationship with God through faith in Jesus. Jesus (a contraction of the Hebrew "Jehoshua" which means "He shall deliver") is the Messiah (Greek: Christ), the One anointed by God to deliver us from the bondage of our sins and the false belief that real pleasure comes from crossing boundaries God has drawn for our good.

Periodically we have hosted a ministry called Exodus International, a ministry of men and women who have struggled with homosexual sin, but are learning what it means to look to Jesus in faith that He will deliver them from their sins (Matthew 1:21: "You shall call His name Jesus, for He will deliver His people from their sins"). We open our arms to the people who come to conferences sponsored by Exodus, many of whom are not even sure that homosexuality is even sin. Ironically, many adulterers who come to our Celebrate Recovery meetings are not sure their sexual activity is wrong either ("How can something that feels so good with someone I love so much be considered 'sin'?").

Al Mohler published today an excellent article entitled So Why Is Incest Wrong? Mohler writes about David Epstein, a professor of political science at Columbia University. Dr. Eptein's wife also teaches at Columbia, and he previously taught on the faculties of Harvard and Stanford. Last week, Dr. Eptein was arraigned before a judge in Manhattan, charged with a single count of felony incest. According to authorities, Professor Epstein was for several years involved in a sexual relationship with his adult daughter, now age 24. Reading the statements by Dr. Epstein's attorney, arguing that Professor Epstein loves his daughter and that there is nothing unhealthy about a consensual, incestuous relationship between adults, I reflected back to something I had read earlier.

A little over three years ago three former leaders of the Christian ministry Exodus International, apologized for their involvement in Exodus and renounced their belief that homosexuality was "sin."  The three early leaders of this Christian ministry, Darlene Bogle, Michael Bussee, and Jeremy Marks, each explained what brought them to their change of heart. Darlene is very specific about the event that caused her to see that "what she had been teaching (i.e. "homosexual behavior is sin") was dead wrong." She writes:

As I was teaching at an Exodus Conference, a woman walked in and sat on the front row. She had long curly black hair and an infectious smile. Her eyes locked with mine, and although the books say there is no such thing as love at first sight, my heart knew better. Her name was Des. I walked to the other side of the room, recounting my journey of healing by rote, but my brain was whirling with thoughts and emotions that I thought were dead. Imagine, if you can, my shock and horror when I realized in that moment, that what I had been teaching was a lie!

I think Darlene has given us a prime example of the importance of everyone defining sin the way God defines it. The Apostle John writes "Sin is the transgression of the law" (I John 3:4). Since nobody but radical, orthodox Jews would argue that the ceremonial, sacrifical and and civil "laws" given by God for Israel to observe are still in force, the question becomes "To what law does God hold us?"

In other words, how do we know what "sin" is?

The young lawyer asked Jesus this same question, and Jesus responded that loving God and your fellow man are the two laws upon which all the law of God are built (Matthew 22:40). But that begs the question: "Are homosexuality, adultery, drunkenness, sexual immorality, stealing, incest, and other specific activities wrong?" Listen, again, to the Apostle John: "But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and sexually immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death" (Revelation 21:8). The New Testament Scriptures set forth the objective standard of God in about as clear a fashion as one could hope.

It would seem to me that the problem people in our culture and world have today is the unwillingness to define sin the way God defines it. The issue with people in evanglical churches is that we often wish to add to the law of God things that God never said ("don't put a woman in leadership," "don't drink," "don't dance," "don't go to movies," etc...)  but the problem with those outside the church is that they wish to take away from the law of God.

God has said homosexual behavior, adulterous behavior, drunken behavior, incestuous behavior, stealing, lying, idolatery, murder, sorcery, and other specific behaviors are outside the boundaries of moral behavior He has established His law for mankind. We all cross the line. He sent Jesus to deliver His people from the bondage, penalty and temporary pleasures our transgressions bring by opening up to us to an understanding of the eternal  pleasures we will find in our relationship with the Deliverer, Jesus Christ.

When a person's definition of sin becomes relevant (i.e. "the moment I saw my lesbian lover I knew that my teaching on homosexuality was wrong"), then one's dying to sin becomes irrelevant. Why die to sin when I can't even call it sin? The danger of allowing our definition of sin to become "relevant" is that we lose the power and pleasure of any relationship with the One whose name, title, and function is to deliver us from those very sins that put us in bondage in the first place.

Before, however, we condemn the homosexual, or the adulterer, or the drunkard, or the gambler, or all other "sinners" by pointing our proverbial finger, we might pause to consider this same Jesus has called our pride, our selfishness, our backbiting, and a host of other activities we seem to revel in sin. How can we who know the intrinsic worth of Jesus find fault in those who refuse to die to their sins when we struggle to die to our own?

My prayer is that today, like everyday, Jesus will convince me that I am the greatest of all sinners. My belief in the presence of sin in my life is the glue (faith) that ties me to the Person and work my Deliverer.