This was painful, and I had some thoughts about whether to speak on this or not. But it needs to be said, and needs to be understood. You may or may not have heard of this, but a PCA church held a conference called "Revoice." (and indeed another one followed among evangelicals). There's a creeping humanism allowing cultural norms and categories into the church. Underlying this is issues of authority, what it means to be human and in attacking the effects and the fruits of salvation, the Gospel itself. Ultimately it ends up not wanting to rid you of your sin, not to free you from your sin, but to free you from it's penalty.
So what does the bible say? Without spending forever being exhaustive, Genesis 1-3 paints a picture of creational design and the complimentarity of the sexes. Sun and moon, earth and water, God and man, mankind and animals, male and female. This is not about personal happiness, particularly post fall where e can be happy in evil. Rather it displays our nature as part of a greater plan and living in God's design.
The fall taints this, even our very desires are called evil. Romans 1 reiterates the fall, and includes fallen sexual desires, even homosexuality.
The Westminster Confession affirms the fallenness of man after Adam's sin in Genesis 3
To get into what proponents teach by their own words let's examine a few.
Things to note is, beyond his attitude of ongoing revelation through his "prophetic witness" is the very plain bitterness that led him to his position. Further he is using the wrong definitions of humanity, design, marriage, sex, etc but it seems first personal.
Wesley Hill another proponent wrote an article for First Things It proves quite revealing, a tad heartbreaking but ultimately concerning. It strikes me that in his article he cites people who weren't focusing on grace and identity rooted in the Gospel, so of course he failed. It became a work project, self-improvement not sanctification. Though he may not realize, what he claims he was handed was all works, which Galatians 3:3 has something to say about that. We were not first born into a Christian life by works or our efforts, but by God's work in us. We do better by realizing the Gospel and resting in it, and so realize it's fruit more in our lives as it changes us from the inside out.
It appears there is the very real issue of expectations and pressures felt by Revoice's proponents. The expectation communicated concerning their "orientation" was that the sin with it's temptation and desire would be guaranteed to go away. With the indwelling sinful nature of our fallen world however, we have no such guarantee of complete removal but conquest. While I have heard account of some who did, and most who had a real trigger (exposure,desire for affection from their sex, identifying with the opposite) total freedom from even the thought sins we commit and desires we have is not guaranteed. In a real sense we learn to say no, but the desire is not guaranteed to disappear completely. What they are describing as having received amount to a self help program. Whether the fault of the church or not, realizing the application of the Gospel as biblically understood and not as a self-help program appears to be a real need.
The church he as in likely failed to teach him the Gospel truly in regards to his sin sounds like he got behavior modification, not being as 2 Corinthians 5:17 a new creature. He cites Paul's speaking in 2 Corinthians 12:1-10, and one can see Hill's anguish in his struggle. However Paul's thorn in the flesh is likely not sin, otherwise Christ would tell him to mortify it Paul's experience in Romans 7 is a perfect description of a Christian experience with sin. Paul is speaking in 2 Corinthians to defend his ministry and in humility is speaking of a weakness or infirmity, not of an indwelling.
These ideas Revoice espouses ultimately come from Freudian thought in the 19th century, itself founded upon humanism. The idea that man is the measure of all things, and can arrive at truth with himself as the basis. Man of course is a finite creature, even a fallen one so this makes little sense. Freud made sexuality a category of identity, not something to describe activity. Whatever your sexual impulses are became defining of your humanity, due of course to Freud's atheism and no doubt own obsession with sex.
It is essential to recognize the PCA is missional and focused on reaching particular groups
Revoice is the most recent example of the creeping humanism in the PCA. There are others, maybe I will mention them some other time but the drift of the PCA is evident.
A story of Augustine's time as Bishop cometo mind. A young deacon was espousing what was an Arian definition of Christ Augustine took time to speak with the young man, listen, and explain to him the scriptural reality and credal testimony. The man became a faithful Christian.
Having been a key proponent and having formerly lived with an LGBT identity, Rosaria Butterfield as always, has much that is true and helpful to say.
The lack of biblical authority and literacy has created a functionally low view of scripture. While the PCA has reiterated in a statement the past the historic theology of the Westminster Confession and Book of Church Order are there has been no declaration on obergfell v hodges (though they have issued statements affirming traditional marriage) while wasting no time to issue statements on racial issues. Nothing officially/constitutionally has been done since at least Obergfell v Hodges decision. A motion to make the biblical definition constitutional in the PCA was rejected, under the claim that it would do nothing to help politically. I would expect, at least to reassure many faithful a statement concerning it and on a base level anthropology would be issued but nothing has of late, stoking fears in the denomination. Now there has to date been no statement or discipline by the denomination concerning Revoice. Without condemning Revoice, the fear (reasonably in my opinion) is "how long will it be till those engaging in it affirm that homosexual practice must be God honoring as well?" and how long will this till The slope is indeed slippery, as it would only be consistent. I haven't even heard appeals to scripture to be applied pastorally, or what it commands of a Christian life by those defending Revoice. If they exist it's not the emphasis. All I'm hearing is the argument to make them feel fine, not encourage growth biblically. You can't be helpful or pastoral without following what scripture says over such a "pragmatic" approach. To truly love someone is to seek the good for them, even if it's uncomfortable.
Those opposed to Revoice are accused of not wanting or helping those identifying as Same-sex attracted to live faithfully (bigotry really) or working against it. But none of us are saying that, and if a person is not mortifying their sin are they really living faithfully? It's that this is unbiblical, and therefore dangerous for those within and without the Revoice conference.
Ultimately the theology of Revoice is also the culture's materialism and view of the world as closed, and an attack therefore on the revelation God has spoken, and the Gospel as enough. This also reflects on their understanding of God, as a God who could create someone with disorder as part of the created order.
The church really does need to talk anthropology, the effects of the Gospel, revelation, biblical authority and even about the authority of societies experts/professionals. And under all of this, who God is and how he intends the universe to be.
The issue is actually one of authority Either man gets to look at this world and determine truth for himself and even invent it, or he is bound to God and his word. This all really did arise out of early modernity's attempt to "professionalize" everything, placing authority in "experts/professionals." To so they felt the need to discredit the clergy, who had the habit of loving God and practicing science to worship him (see TGC's article).
Some have already left the PCA, others are considering it I would advise what Luther and Machen thought, stay and witness until they kick you out.
Fear not though for he who is in us is greater than the world (1 John 4:4) Because Christ reigns and because this movement is founded on untruth, it must collapse, lord willing sooner rather than later.
Pray for the PCA
Revoice is the fruits of many different thoughts from the same source, all culminating in the "Gay Christian movement." The teach comes from "spiritual friendship," the celibate gay Christian movement, and contra-biblical worldly professionalism (more on that later). The reasoning for it is to integrate these identifying gay Christians in to the church by leaving their sexuality as an integral part of their identity. While bringing them into the church and making them disciples is a very Godly thing it matters upon what ideas this is done, otherwise we risk harming them and not making the Christians but in name only.
In short Revoice teaches that their sexual desires (or aesthetic as they call it often) for those of the same-sex is pre-fall and God ordained. Only acting on this is wrong. Non-volitional sins, or sins of the heart are said not to exist (a Catholic not Reformed teaching) and being LGBT is claimed to really be a disordering of friendship, not sexuality. This poses many problems, and defenders appear to be talking about preventing harm. Of course if it's not true it causes even more harm in the end and feelings aren't of utmost importance. In any case this is a recent development that attempts to call itself not only historic but biblical though it is a recent and distinct development.
Not to mention Jesus condemns "porneia" a term for breaking the Levitical sex laws (Matthew 1:1-8), and condemns lusting after someone in your heart (Matthew 5:27-30).Jesus condemns lusting in your heart, so even breaking the law in your heart is condemned (Matthew 5:27-28)
The Pastor of the church in question was interviewed by CrossPolitic and it as quite informative.
Dr Nate Collins, who is leading the conference spoke as well and it was quite revealing (the intro is up to about minute 25 and then Dr Nate Collins' speech is shown and analyzed
I do wonder what he feels expectations are for him, and he seems to have resigned to a defeat
He can't give up his desires here on earth, so they must be for eternity The Church just has to deal with him If you don't feel like you can live up to something, the human mind almost always tries to accept itself as is His resentment of the "idolatry of the nuclear family" and desire for a man to spend his life with is particularly painful, as he is a married man who identifies as Same sex attracted
This displays the underlying humanism, starting with man and his experiences. Collins is projecting his sin back into the created order as if it is what God intended and projecting it's presence forward into eternity. It's a sad state of affairs indeed to see someone so hopeless.
How can Wesley Hill expect to succeed if he's taught a "try this method" and not the preaching of the Gospel? To develop sanctification we begun with the Gospel, starting with being and identity then work out from there into action. At least from his testimony, it makes sense he would feel no other option.
He's really looking to be fine with himself, so he's resorted to "whatever is about me is right" concerning his feelings. You will also find among Revoice's proponents the theme of shame is repeated time and again. We all sin and should all be ashamed, the question is where do we go from there. We go to the Gospel and rest in what Christ has done for us and the rich inheritance we have in him (Ephesians 1-2). Shame isn't the end, it is intended to draw us to Grace. The only alternative is the pop psychology "accept yourself" that pervades today.
The question as ith all things must start with who God is, all things follow. Is God so pure even thoughts are to be judged (Jesus judged the pharisees thoughts in Matthew 9:1-5). The evil of man's heart is acknowledged in Genesis, both before and after the flood (Genesis 6:4-6, Genesis 8:20-22).
So much of this appears to be an attempt at being fine with oneself under the belief this desire cannot change. 1 Corinthians 6 disagrees, and ultimately this conclusion is reached from not understanding the application of the Gospel. I would even say,beyond it being an escape from God's wrath into the world to come.
To do they have knowingly or unknowingly drawn from the philosophies of the world or the unsaved group they are trying to reach.
This has as always, reached the seminaries and it's from there it's spreading out
While I have heard from one attendee the professors do not support it, students very much do
Covenant Seminary's statement addresses denies that it endorses Revoice What people say is important, what they fail to mention is equally so though. Covenant doesn't condemn wrong desires as sinful. Reportedly from online acquaintances however the staff is against it. Among the students however, it is quite popular.
While many in Revoice believe the Gospel or profess too, it is evident they don't know the implications of it fully These issues come from a failure to teach the biblical anthropology of what a human is, not just giving direct answers on what and what not do. Revoice may aim to "help" by curbing emotional pain but since it is a falsehood set to failure, it only does more harm than good.
The time to lob heretic bombs may come, and for some it should In the meantime I suggest faithful witness, teaching the areas of need such as anthropology and of course faithfully teaching the fullness of the Gospel to those in our churches Revoice included.
Revoice, where they teach the Gospel has the seeds of witness however horribly in error and contradiction they are in other ways. The Gospel is incompatible with the philosophies they are bringing in from the world, and when pressed and taught such a flimsy philosophical half breed always dies. People become more consistent with the underlying wisdom to which they subscribe The heretics will expose themselves, and the believers will as well.
I've heard so many support and defend this, what seems most devastating to me is the lack of knowledge of the Gospel. Biblical literacy is appallingly low, and people are living with the bible outside of the center of their lives. So much of this really does flow from the failure to see the bible as speaking to all of life, and having no real clue as to what it says. The bible needs to be the authority, not an authority. The bible speaks to all things and our first categories must be from it. Now it's time for the conservatives to organize to turn the tide, teach in civility and above all be biblical. I recommend works like John Owen's The Mortification of Sin. "
"Do you mortify? Do you make it your daily work? Be always at it whilst you live; cease not a day from this work; be killing sin or it will be killing you."- John Owen
I've heard "they're trying to be faithful" but if they're not willing to mortify their sins, are they? The question of what is faithfulness is one of the main questions, and only scripture gets to tell us.
If we try to make it more palatable and mix the Gospel it with worldly wisdom as the church of Thyatira (Revelation 2:18-30) did we don't win people to the Gospel but the world. Useful thoughts Per Brad Littlejohn.
Ultimately though it bears more discussion elsewhere, you can only have experts if you believe in the priesthood of all believers Either we stand on God's wisdom to explore the world and ground our expertise in something of value and truth or it is worth nothing. It simply becomes all man's opinion.
To do so they saw fit to divorce society and their practices from scripture. In such a materialistic and closed universe, whatever is is right. And in a world where all are simply human (and chemical) nobody can really have any value, and all becomes opinion. To have experts and professionals at all (which I am for) we need to have the priesthood of all believers and subjection to scripture.A return to biblical categories as foundational (including terms such as porneia and sin) are vital to not just this issue but human flourishing. The bible is the authority on all things for it speaks to all things, so why not use the terms and categories God gives us? The big question is one of faithfulness, and how to be faithful. We cannot be faithful to God if we are not to scripture.
No comments:
Post a Comment