Welcome to Western Christianity! Whenever someone does something (no matter how juvenile, disrespectful, offensive, or crass it may be) as long as they slap the label “Christian” on it, it magically becomes acceptable, in spite of the standard of conduct representative of God’s elect as found throughout the Scriptures. And worse, there’s also an endless supply of professing Christians who will defend and support even the most irreverent and offensive pragmatic acts. I know, I used to be one of them.
The person in the following video unnecessarily causes himself to vomit during his “testimony,” I suppose for the purpose of illustration. Try pulling this stunt in a kindergarten, at a convalescent home, or in front of a family and see the reaction you get. I expect this behavior from the world, not from a professing Christian who is giving a testimony. This is appalling and is an offense to any reasonable thinking person. It makes a mockery of Christianity and is a reproach to the name of Christ.
And when this childish behavior (from someone who claims to have been converted two years earlier) is questioned, the relevant, everything-goes crowd rushes to defend it.
Those who would generally support and defend this behavior are usually found in support and defense of similar behaviors such as those found in this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, and this post. Ironically those same people who smile approvingly at the antics in these posts are the first to condemn what we do here on DefCon.
Case in point:
I left the following comment on A Little leaven after I came across the video featured in this post (see here).
What came out of his mouth was awful! And I’m not talking about the corn flakes, I am talking about his “theology.” – The Pilgrim
It didn’t take long for the defenders of disgusting, innapropriate, juvenile behavior–all in the name of Christ, of course–to come rushing to his defense. The first challenge came from “Barb” who obviously took offense to my comment. Granted, she did not approve of his puking during his testimony, but it was obvious she took more offense at anyone who dared question him:
Defending/Contending: Please read my comment on this post if you haven’t already (it’s at the very top), and then, in light of those considerations, explain just what is so very wrong with this young brother’s “theology.”
I give Barb the benefit of the doubt that her inquiry was serious (in spite of her preemptive log-in-the-eye remark), however, then came condescending “Chadm” who arrogantly snubbed his nose at anyone who would dare question the guy in the video, and left this pompous comment (among others):
Barb- I seriously doubt we will get a response from Chris or defending contending….Theres much to say until its time to defend and contend……..<‘}}}><
The strongest opposition against striving to live a life of decency and holiness comes not from the world (they’re anxiously waiting to meet a Christian who actually practices what he preaches), but it comes from the very ones who claim to be Christians.
Now, I have no idea if the guy in this video is saved. If he truly has been regenerated, then the Holy Spirit will begin to work in his life (even though he claims God came into his life two years ago) and he’ll curtail his behavior that most reasonable people (saved and unsaved) find appalling.
However, if he has not been regenerated and he is just another victim of a false conversion, then those who defend, promote, and encourage him to continue in this type of behavior all the while directly or indirectly assuring him that everything’s ok, when it’s not, will have his blood on their hands come the day of judgment.
And finally, in regards to Barb’s inquiry, here is what I meant in regards to his theology:
1). This guy’s current condition came about after he felt there was more to life, not because he recognized the sinfulness of his sin, his hopeless situation, and his total dependence on the shed blood of Christ. It’s the old “add Jesus to your life as an accessory to make it better” doctrine.
2). He wrested Revelation 3:20 (not Revelation 13:20) from its original context and intended use, (it is a message to the churches).
3). He attempts to place our salvation into our hands, as if we have any power to save ourselves and thus portrays our sovereign God as helpless.
4). He claims God can’t/won’t do anything and won’t “come in” until we do something first. Again, he’s putting salvation into man’s hands as he claims that God wants you to stand up and open the door.
5). He tells us that we should make that choice, because “it’s worth it.” Again, this puts salvation into the hands of man and also trivializes the gravity of the need of salvation by saying “it’s worth it.” This is a very man-centered, self-centered “Jesus-will-make-your-life-better” message, (although this guy never mentions Jesus in his testimony) and it’s not a “gospel” you’ll find preached anywhere in Scripture.
6). And finally, he says that God wants to reach out to you but you have to start running toward him. Again, here he portrays God as helpless and that the price Christ paid to redeem His elect wasn’t enough because God still requires man to do his part. This is classic Mormonism.
Now if your theology lines up pretty well with his then I don’t expect you to see the error, nor do I expect you to agree with me, so wrangling over your Arminian and Pelagian leanings will be pointless as will any wrangling done on my part.
Christ Alone Wyoming 
Hi Pilgrim,
I agree with you in that the verses in Rev. 3 are a message to the churches.
In addition, verse 22 states that one has to have “ears to hear”. Man cannot “hear”
what the Spirit (of God) is saying without receiving the gift of “hearing” from God.
Without that gift, the message of the gospel is foolishness to them.
This is further proof that salvation is all of God. Without God’s intervention, no one
would be saved.
LikeLike
Pilgrim,
Don’t you think that kid is really cool? He’s even European. What more can people ask for to convince them to raise themselves from the dead (Ephesians 2:1)? All this kid is doing is repeating most other pastors he’s heard, although the vomiting is a new one.
The gospel is sufficient (Romans 1:16).
Bill
LikeLike
Hello Pilgrim,
I’ve been reading your blog for the past 2 months and I find it very intriguing. One thing I have noticed is that when you comment on heretics or people you believe are preaching a message contrary to the gospel, you often focus on pointing out why you are right and they are wrong instead of the central focus being talking about our Lord Jesus Christ and the truth. You pointed out rather well that “this guy never mentions Jesus in his testimony” but have you read your own blog? You confess to “defend truth” and “contend for the faith” but your main focus is rarely on talking about the life giving blood that Jesus gives to sinners such as you and I. Even in this post, the most gospel you preached was “1). This guy’s current condition came about after he felt there was more to life, not because he recognized the sinfulness of his sin, his hopeless situation, and his total dependence on the shed blood of Christ.”. Outside of that I could not find this gospel clearly mentioned until a July 26 post entitled “My Theology” to see you mention ‘Jesus’ pertaining to the gospel. Do not get me wrong, brother, I think that showing heretics for who they are is very beneficial(with God’s using it of course) to strengthening fellow believers and leading them back to the true church but it is next to useless if you do not show the gospel alongside of it. The truth, the gospel, that we, God’s people, are more sinful than we ever feared, but are more loved by God than we could ever have imagined must be prominent! Please show the gospel alongside your “rightness” in regards to theology.
May our God who has given his life for us continue to guide us and lead us through His Holy Spirit.
Brandon
LikeLike
Change “Barb” to “Brandon” and you’ve got the exact thing you wrote about here in your comments section. How could you know that would happen? Who would’ve thought????
LikeLike
Jim,
I never once said that I agree with the man’s theology. I would call his theology wrong. My point was that a blog attesting to defend the faith should focus on Jesus Christ primarily instead of just showing people to be wrong in their own theology.
Example:
“5). He tells us that we should make that choice, because “it’s worth it.” Again, this puts salvation into the hands of man and also trivializes the gravity of the need of salvation by saying “it’s worth it.” This is a very man-centered, self-centered “Jesus-will-make-your-life-better” message, (although this guy never mentions Jesus in his testimony) and it’s not a “gospel” you’ll find preached anywhere in Scripture.”
He says a true thing, that ” This is a very man-centered, self-centered “Jesus-will-make-your-life-better” message” but he doesn’t mention the alternative, that Jesus is the salvation of all men and that his grace doesn’t just fix problems in your life but instead it saves your soul and changes you from the inside out to make you more like Him because He loves you.
Jim, where do you see in this post or the one previous that I was defending the man’s testimony as being true? I did no such thing. Please read what I write and actually think about it if you want to criticize the things I say.
Brandon
LikeLike
I haven’t watched the video and don’t intend to.
There is enough filth in the world without using this as a supposed means of ‘evangelism’, which this is not. Well, it’s not Biblical evangelism anyway.
Thanks.
LikeLike
“you often focus on pointing out why you are right and they are wrong “. ’nuff said?
LikeLike
My focus is not on being right or wrong but on Christ and His gospel being the main aspect on a reformed blog.
LikeLike
Dear Brandon:
Thank you for your comment.
First I’d like to say that this blog is not a “reformed blog” as you said. Most of the six of us may consider ourselves reformed, but it is not a “reformed blog” per se. However, what it is, is a blog to defend truth and contend for the faith (hence the subtitle). Now if I got one dollar for every time someone counseled me on how I should run my blog and what I should or shouldn’t write about, I could blog for a living.
Let me put it this way: If you came across a blog entitled All Things NFL you pretty much know what to expect. The blog would be about the sport of the national football league. Now on a blog like that, you would expect to see all sorts of topics such as, fantasy football picks, the NFL draft, who the experts believe will be in the next superbowl, etc. You’ll also expect news and commentary on the latest games. What you probably wouldn’t expect to find a lot of is the rules of the game. Why? Because a blog like that is written by NFL fans for NFL fans and the knowledge of the rules would be a foregone conclusion for anyone who frequents the blog. But this does not mean that if an issue or question about the rules came up that it would be shunned. It just means that predominantly the blog would be about what’s happening now in the NFL, and not the basics of the NFL.
Likewise, DefCon is not Theology 101, and it’s written by Christians for Christians. There’s a certain expectation that most people who frequent here (and many who applaud us for what we do) already know and understand the true gospel of Jesus Christ, otherwise they’d not only be uncomfortable on a blog like this, they would probably have an aversion to it. This, however, does not mean that we never discuss the gospel, it just may not be enough to your liking.
And although we may not present the gospel enough to your liking, we are not opposed to presenting it when the situation presents itself.
Now this leads me into Jim W’s comment. I can completely empathize with him. I too am suspect of your true intentions. Why? Because so many who oppose what we do on DefCon come in here under the guise of being on our side, employing some flattering remark in their first sentence, but quickly the comment disintegrates into their absolute opposition and loathing of this blog.
Is this the case with you? I do not know, and I don’t venture to know. But I do remain leery, especially when you make a comment like Jim W so aptly keyed on (and other comments that oftentimes betray one’s true intentions). For example, you said, “you often focus on pointing out why you are right and they are wrong,” (forgetting that I am not the final authority, but the Scriptures are).
That type of wording smacks of someone who genuinely does not agree with me. It is remarks like that that put up red flags. My discretion in the matter comes from my myriad of experiences over the last year of blogging, with those who oppose me and this blog.
You’re not unique, though, in your criticism. I often hear that we don’t do this enough or we do that too much. I guess it comes with the territory. For those people I often suggest they start their own blog (free on WordPress) and soon enough they will become victims of the same thing they do to others (mainly, dictating what others should or shouldn’t say on their blog).
So many times those who are in disagreement with me (and are mounting an attack), approach me acting as a brother, but instead are only interested in getting close enough to give me a Judas kiss.
I hope you understand my apprehension (and Jim W’s as well). We could both be completely wrong in our estimation, but experience dictates otherwise. Like I said, I don’t know your true intentions, but I expect that your response to this comment to reveal much, much more.
Sincerely,
– The Pilgrim
LikeLike
Pilgrim,
First, I agree with your own displaying of false prophets for who they really are and I thank you for the work you do and for responding to my comment as well. I genuinely think that this site exposes and shows people a world that they may be either ignorant to or may help show people who are under the influence of these false shepherds the way to our Lord. My comments were made for a purpose and the purpose is this: The gospel message is at the heart of the church and it must be shown clearly and often. You very clearly showed this man’s false doctrine as false however Christ did not come just to reveal what is false but to reveal what is true.
4:1 Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God, we do not lose heart. 2 But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God. 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants [2] for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
We do not proclaim Christ only by showing false doctrines but by displaying the truth in a clear way, speaking the gospel to all. The main way we show something false is by proclaiming the truth.
You spoke about this blog being “written by Christians for Christians”. I would challenge you to consider that all people who read your blog are not truly saved. That there is a number of lost souls that do not call themselves Christians who come to your website desperately needing to hear the gospel. I would also challenge you to consider the people who call themselves Christians but truly have never been given life by the Holy Spirit. Consider the man who calls himself a Christian, comes to your site, reads what you say and agrees with you that other people are wrong yet doesn’t hear the gospel message in a clear way.
You also commented that: (forgetting that I am not the final authority, but the Scriptures are).
Do you not see that though you may (and I think you do often) speak the truth that it is you who people agree with if you do not show the gospel(scriptures etc..) that reveals the heresy.
Please brother, think about what I have wrote. I know my own faith is weak but I also know deeply that the gospel message is sooo important, that we have all fallen short of God’s glory but God has made a righteousness known apart from the law.
We never graduate from the gospel and the moment we deviate from its truth and think of something better to focus on is where the roots of heresy, which this site works so hard at exposing, begin.
Brandon
btw, that is 2 Corin 4 that I quoted
LikeLike
Brandon:
Everything you said I completely agree with, but I’m still not sold on your perception of my/our alleged deficiency.
I pray that I do not allow pride to blind me from correction, and that if I am in error, that my heart will respond accordingly.
I agree that the Gospel is by and far the most important thing in life. Hence my take on how Romans 1:16 is interpreted (found in this post). I also agree that the pointing out of error does not save, but the preaching of the Gospel does.
What I am not completely sold on is the assertion that there isn’t enough preaching of the Gospel here. I don’t believe that what you’re requesting is a sermon in every post, but I scratch my head to understand what you do suggest . . . what you think would be the acceptable standard for a blog of this nature (e.g. discernment) in containing the gospel message.
I concede many of our posts don’t contain a gospel message, but I hand-select every sermon posted on here after listening to it. These sermons alone contain not only sound biblical doctrine, but many times the pure preaching of the gospel. We also often feature videos of sermons and messages that clearly present the gospel, and in the comments section with discourses between readers the gospel is sometimes presented. We also get a lot of e-mails (behind the scenes) from readers seeking help in matters that no one knows about because these are kept confidential and never get talked about on the blog.
This is why I have such trouble agreeing with you on this point. I agree with the need for the gospel, but I disagree with your perception that it is completely void on DefCon. I have received tons of criticism, personal attacks, threat of lawsuit, stalking, name-calling, hate-mail, etc. over the last year for what I/we do. And this is the first time someone has criticized me/us for not presenting the gospel enough. I am not sure what the standard is that you are seeking in a blog format such as this, and I’m not sure if anyone could provide a standard that everyone could agree on.
Now regarding me specifically (so you understand my heart), I am big on the gospel and the gospel alone. Some may not believe me on this because the only side they see of me is what is on the blog, and (as you charge) there’s not a consistent sermon presented on the gospel in enough of the posts. But truth be known, I strive to know noting but Christ and Him crucified. What do I mean?
Let me give you an example. I have written and produced a cult flyer for distribution that deals with LDS and JWs. But when I completed it I realized that there was no room for the gospel message. And I understand that it would be a futile effort to furnish a cult flyer exposing the LDS and JW cults, but then not providing the truth of the true gospel. So I also wrote and produced three gospel tracts to go with the flyer (which can be handed out by themselves—apart from the flyer—too). I can e-mail you a copy of this material if you wish.
Another example is that I preach every week at a local health facility, and I go verse by verse through the Bible (right now it’s Matthew). But no matter what my text for the day is, I always make a beeline to the gospel. Week after week, after week, I preach law and gospel, law and gospel, law and gospel. Occasionally I touch on false teachers/false teachings, but my “target audience” (for lack of a better term) is the unsaved who are in poor health and may not be back next week. Whereas, the “target audience” (ugh, I loathe that expression) on DefCon is primarily Christians, (but this is not a blog on Theology 101), and thus, I address issues, news, and commentary on the modern church on DefCon along with the other contributors. Each setting (whether it be a health care facility or a discernment blog), has a pronounced slant, but not at the exclusion of each other. I can e-mail you one of my messages from the health care facility if you wish.
Now, as you mentioned, not everyone who comes to DefCon is truly saved, but DefCon’s intended purpose was never to preach a sermon in every post, while conversely my purpose—whether it’s passing out cult flyers, street witnessing, inviting the JWs inside to “chat,” preaching in convalescent homes, etc.—is! In these settings the emphasis is not on news, and commentary, and cults, but on law and gospel, law and gospel (not that the law saves, but that it points us to the One who does).
I said all that to give you a better perspective of me personally and so that you understand that I have no aversion to the gospel, it is the very reason I do what I do and for the sacrifices I make, because it’s the gospel that saves. I understand the importance of it, and when I preach, it is all law and gospel.
Now that brings me to ask, what is your suggestion in this matter? What and how would you (if you were running DefCon) change what you see as a problem? Do I demand that all contributors post a gospel message in every one of their posts? Every other post? Every third post? Do I assign someone to just preach sermons and restrict them from posting any news or commentary? Do I write a gospel message and require it to be copied and pasted in every post? I’m not being sarcastic, I’m being serious.
And if you do offer a suggestion, what do I do with the next person who comes after you and does not like that format? And he claims that we should do this and that instead? That there’s not enough emphasis on this, or there’s too much emphasis on that?
Again, I understand where you’re coming from, but I don’t view what we’re doing here as pessimistically as you do. I think we are presenting the gospel and very helpful information and this is evidenced not only by the thank-you’s that we receive in the comments sections, but the many e-mails of thanks that we receive as well.
Finally, something has troubled me about this all. An aspect of that may have escaped your notice:
As a brother, you have presented an open and public rebuke in your indictment of me (and the other five contributors to this blog) on a matter where you feel we are wrong (not sure if you go as far as to suggest it’s sin or not).
I have two problems with this:
1). I would have hoped that if you took issue with me/us, you would have approached me/us privately in the matter instead of publicly.
2). By doing this publicly have you not emboldened the very false teachers and proponents of heretical doctrine we seek to expose on here? Does this not serve (whether directly or indirectly) as an encouragement to them?
LDS, for example, pride themselves on claiming that the Christian Church can’t possibly be true because of all the denominations and splits (while they hide, omit, and ignore the fact that they too have splits and fractions). So here a Mormon (or any cult member for that matter) can point the finger and say, “See, what that DefCon blog is doing is wrong and this Brandon guy called them on it.” Or, “See, they can’t even agree on this stuff, why believe anything they have to say.”
Just some food for thought.
Respectfully,
– The Pilgrim
LikeLike
Methinks I’m looking forward to visiting Brandon’s very own gospel blog. The concept sounds refreshing. So Brandon, where can I find the link to your blog?
In Christ,
CD
PS – The “My Theology” post wasn’t the work of The Pilgrim…in fact I gave the rest of Team DefCon much to disagree about in that little missive.
LikeLike
The Pilgrim–
To your entry’s title–“The Gospel is supposed to be the stumbling block and offense, not our behavior.”–I say Amen, and Amen!
I was one of the people who left a comment to the entry you referenced on A Little Leaven. I profess Christ, but do not condone the circus-type antics that some churches have substituted for the Gospel.
I can’t put a label on my theology, as I’m still studying Scripture to form an understanding based solely on God’s Word. It’s a process–and has taken me quite a lot longer than the two years the young man in the video has been a Christian. I suspect that there may be other people like me out there, who perhaps chew and digest things a little more slowly than others.
For label-less people like me, trying to find sound commentary online is much like navigating a minefield. There’s so much bickering, name-calling, passive aggression, sarcasm, and defensiveness. If I may quote you: “I expect this behavior from the world, not from a professing Christian who is giving a testimony.” That’s my lament when reading these kinds of things. We all let things fly out of our mouths when we speak before thinking, but few people seem to appreciate that, with writing, we can read through everything we’re about to say before clicking the “Publish” or “Comment” button.
Weaker brothers and sisters who may be reading are forgotten as people release things into the public ether of the Internet that may cause them to stumble.
Surely teaching and even debate can be done without these things? Why on earth should one be defensive or sarcastic when speaking of the Gospel? If anything, a person with confidence in their God and the guidance of the indwelling Holy Spirit is profoundly blessed with grace that they might bless others in the same way, speaking all Truth in 1 Corinthians 13 love.
That said, could you have responded to Barb’s question, stating your case as you did later in the post, without the commentary on her tone and behavior? Was that necessary to the statement of your position? And, to quote you once again, you said, “This is appalling and is an offense to any reasonable thinking person.” Was that statement absolutely necessary?
I would hope to be a reasonable, thinking person, yet I’m neither appalled nor offended by the aforementioned video. (Nor am I appalled or offended by your commentary, either; I am, though, eager to hear the reasons why you included it.)
I’m not encouraging or endorsing the young man’s behavior. I’m simply standing alongside him as a fellow broken human being, hopeless if not for the work of Christ. As I said in my comment, “The vomiting was gross, but so is the metaphor used in Scripture. The verse evokes a vivid mental image, which is, I believe, precisely the reason it’s used. It’s not a “polite” or genteel way of describing how God feels about lukewarmness. Seeing this guy vomit on video isn’t that far from what I picture when reading the word ‘vomit.'”
If he’s a false convert, then I will pray that God will break through to him. If he is, like me, a Christian who has come out of a childhood and adolescence that most people cannot fathom, a Christian whose sanctification process has taken longer than the average (if there IS an average), then I will pray that God will continue to refine him. But I have a responsibility to pray for him either way–as, I think, does everyone who knows about him and professes the name of Christ.
And that’s the biggest reason why I find online Christian theology blogs so difficult to read sometimes: For all the earnest talk of what’s wrong with individuals and organizations that profess Christ, there’s very little mention of our responsibility in prayer.
Perhaps all of these things are brought to our attention for a reason? Perhaps the Father wants us to do more than talk about them?
LikeLike
“The strongest opposition against striving to live a life of decency and holiness comes not from the world (they’re anxiously waiting to meet a Christian who actually practices what he preaches), but it comes from the very ones who claim to be Christians.”
Amen. The World sees the hypocrisy of the “almost Christians.” The World expects Christians to dress modestly, to not curse, and to be sober minded. Only the “almost Christians” think they must shock and awe in order to get an audience so they can save them from their empty, worthless lives to a life of purpose.
Berean Wife
LikeLike
Jennifer:
Thanks for your comment.
I guess what seems to be bothering me the most about all this is the amount of comments here (and on A.L.L.) in which the opening remarks are something to the effect of:
“I believe what he did was gross/wrong/inappropriate/etc.” but then, after paying lip-service, they proceed throughout the rest of the comment to rail against anyone who dared to question this guy’s behavior.
A behavior that was juvenile and unacceptable, not saying that this means he’s not saved by virtue of this act, but after being allegedly born again two years prior, why is he still acting like some college kids showing off at a frat party? What’s the problem with this picture, Jennifer? For crying out loud, this was done while he’s supposedly giving a testimony of his conversion (a testimony that is completely void of Jesus Christ, I might add). Isn’t anything holy, sacred, and treated with reverence anymore? Perhaps this is just a sad testament of the dumbing-down and compromise the Church has been going through for years now. I mean, after all, when Biblical illiteracy is as high as it is, who’s to say this guy was acting out of line? What standard do we use?
In regards to your issue with me saying: “This is appalling and is an offense to any reasonable thinking person.” I stand by my statement but with one caveat: I should have said “reasonable thinking Christian,” as I don’t expect the world to be offended by this as much as Christians should be (but I am not so sure of this anymore). Seriously, Jennifer, what do you think the reasonable people of the world thinks of us when we act like this? “Wow, did you see how he just made himself puke? Give me Jesus too!”
Did I make the “reasonable” remark as a slight, or attack? No. But I don’t pull punches! When someone is claiming to give a Christian testimony (devoid of Christ) and behaves in that manner, (and video tapes it and posts it on Youtube) it is now in the public arena and needs to be addressed.
I don’t want the world thinking that Christians believe this is acceptable without at least one voice of protest (even if it is shouted down by other professing Christians). And I certainly won’t defend it as,”he’s just got more sanctification to go through.” Fine, go grow in the Lord but don’t be an offense to the world and a reproach to the Lord by your behavior in the meantime, (unless the offense is because you are preaching Christ and Him crucified).
I don’t know how much more plain and simple I can make it. For those who have more of an issue with me and Chris for daring to question this behavior, than they do with the behavior itself, then my “reasonable person/Christian” remark, I think, is valid. And if you (or anyone else) has more of an issue with me and Chris, then we must admit that we simply will not see eye to eye on this matter no matter what each of us says. I mean seriously, you seem more upset at my “reasonable person” remark than this guy’s behavior.
I for one am so tired of the low-brow, dishonoring, gutter-behavior, potty-humor that seems so prevalent today of so many people claiming the name of Christ, (usually done for evangelism to show the world how cool we are so Jesus must be cool too).
Why are we encouraging and defending behavior like this (whether directly or indirectly) instead of exhorting, encouraging, and (oh my) rebuking and correcting those who are dragging Christ’s name through the mud?
We need more men and women of God to raise a standard of decency by living as examples of those who have been called out to follow Christ. This starts in our own lives and our own homes first.
Why is it that any time I raise this subject I get drowned out by the plethora of voices encouraging compromise? We are not supposed to blend so well with the world that a difference can’t be seen.
Sincerely,
– The Pilgrim
LikeLike
Pilgrim,
And all God’s people said, “AMEN AND AMEN!!!!”
The Desert Pastor
Never Compromise!
LikeLike
I’m not sure whether you count me as one of the folks who “railed” against people who “dared to question” the young man’s behavior. And I don’t understand the basis for your comment that I seem “more upset at [your] ‘reasonable person’ remark than this guy’s behavior.” I clearly stated in my first comment that I was neither appalled nor offended by your statement. But I did ask if it–and the statements you made about Barb–were necessary to your point. And I suppose I wanted to know if you saw them as beneficial or encouraging to the Body. I don’t believe that you actually answered that question.
As you point out in your reply, there are two issues here: There’s the young man’s behavior in the video, and then there’s the question of what our response should be and how it should be delivered. I’m not advocating that “punches” should be pulled–I’m advocating a deliberate choice in our words, taking a moment to step back and re-read (or think) before we speak. There are ways to speak the hardest truths that won’t inflict unnecessary wounds–the truth is wound enough.
It seems to me that you are saying that if someone doesn’t share your view of the first issue (the video), then they aren’t to share their thoughts on the second (our response). You seem to view the first issue as the most important, but I see them as equally important, because, not only are the eyes of the world on the young man in the video, but they are also on us as we discuss him.
You’re concerned with how they will view us if we don’t stridently oppose this video.
The world hates us. They aren’t looking for holiness; they want to see what they perceive to be our hypocrisy. They want to see us lie, cheat, steal, fornicate, etc. And they love to watch Christians argue with one another. In-fighting, name-calling, using the same things they use to jab at one another and wound–they find this eminently entertaining. They love watching our reactions to people who have offended us or offended our God. These things encourage them to mock us even more–and, thus, to mock Christ.
I’m not an apologist for this young man–I know nothing about him beyond what I heard in the video. But I’m no different from him in that I’ve brought reproach to the name of Christ too. Not by the exact same behavior, but every time I sin or behave in a foolish manner, I cause the name of Christ to be sneered at. Some of my sin and foolishness has been witnessed by others; most has been hidden in my deceitful heart. I am so grateful for the conviction, discipline, and restoration of God, and doubly grateful that that correction is void of condemnation. God is teaching me how to go to my brothers and sisters in love–He models it for me all the time.
I’m not responsible for this young man’s behavior, but I AM responsible to pray for him. That should be our automatic response to sinners within and without the Body of Christ. Yes, rebuke in love, but plead with the Body to go to God in prayer first!
You lament the dearth of decency, and I lament the dearth of love amongst Christians. Both are sorely lacking. There is a place for correction and for rebuke–this is Biblical–but so is love. How often do you see Christians engaging each other in ways that are patient, kind, selfless, humble, protecting, trusting, hopeful, and persevering? Never rude or easily angered?
I fervently believe that if we paid more attention to obeying the “one anothers,” the world would have much less ammunition against us. If we modeled care for the weaker ones among us, and true compassion for the lost, some of them might even stop laughing long enough to hear the Word of God.
LikeLike
They love watching our reactions to people who have offended us or offended our God.
That being the case, we should not say anything when we see something like the dispicable display shown in this video. We should not react negatively when we see some guy upchuck in the name of Jesus. Is that what you’re saying?
Yes, obviously we should pray for this guy. But at the same time, we need to react negatively to this kind of thing, lest the world sees us to be no different from it. Consider Paul’s admonition for us to not be conformed to this world (Romans 12:2). The phrase “be not conformed,” the word “conformed” is a verb, and it is in the passive voice. What does that mean? It means that we allow the world to conform us to fit into its image. It is something we allow to be done to us. We are not to passively allow the world to make us look like it. And when we don’t speak out against crap like this, we are doing just that–telling the world that salvation is nothing more than “asking Jesus into your heart,” and that it doesn’t require any change in our behavior.
If we do not stand up for decency in the church, then it will continue down the slope this young man is on.
LikeLike
“That being the case, we should not say anything when we see something like the dispicable display shown in this video. We should not react negatively when we see some guy upchuck in the name of Jesus. Is that what you’re saying?”
I’m not sure how you came to that conclusion based on the text of my comment. Maybe you can explain it. In no way do I believe that staying silent when you feel the Spirit is compelling you to speak is the right thing to do. (Which is precisely why I commented on A Little Leaven, and here, in the first place. I felt compelled to speak–and I tried very hard to avoid emotionalism or defensiveness or anything that could wound a reader. Please forgive me if I have been rude.)
What I’m saying, what I did say was:
“I’m not advocating that ‘punches’ should be pulled–I’m advocating a deliberate choice in our words, taking a moment to step back and re-read (or think) before we speak. There are ways to speak the hardest truths that won’t inflict unnecessary wounds–the truth is wound enough.”
By all means, speak. But be careful and wise in how you do so. Lumping everyone who doesn’t share your view into one category isn’t a very effective way to further your position. Calling other people out for their ungracious tone isn’t effective either, especially if you’ve not modeled a gracious tone in your response to them. Writing off legitimate questions and making assumptions about the feelings of someone who is honestly trying to engage with you and learn isn’t effective either.
To speak in ways that cause weaker members of the Body to stumble, or to cause the unsaved to mock us–how is this a good thing? How are we salt and light to a dying world when we belittle people’s mental capacity because they do not share our view?
” . . . at the same time, we need to react negatively to this kind of thing, lest the world sees us to be no different from it.”
Absolutely–but the Word is also very clear on how we are to speak. There are a few instances I can think of offhand when someone speaks harshly in rebuke, but there are many, many passages that speak of the power of our words and lays out standards for our speech. If we’re going to hold one person accountable for being indecent in his speech/behavior, we’d better make sure that we’re not disobeying the Word in some way ourselves. How do two wrongs make a right?
It’s clear that God intends our speech to be edifying–even when we’re faced with the task of reproving a brother or sister. Titus 3:2-3 comes immediately to mind.
I’m not sure that I will comment further, because I don’t know if this can be discussed dispassionately here.
LikeLike
Today I shared with a finred Karen about the urgency of sharing Jesus with others. Christians should look for opportunities to share why we believe. It was an encouraging call and I believe she is motivated to share her testimony now!
LikeLike
Pilgrim, I’m so glad I found this post today. For years we masqueraded as Christians and everyone was happy with us, but once the Lord grabbed a hold of us and regenerated our hearts, and out went the T.V, the public schools, the alcohol, Christmas etc, and in came the bible, suddenly the Christians in our life think we are radical and taking the bible too far. And yet we are by no means discouraged, one cannot have an encounter with God almighty and remain the same. Never compromise!!!!!
LikeLike