‘Nashville Statement’ condemns LGBT Christians and those who support them

[Squire Robertsson]

Folks, Matt lives in Hampshire, England. Thus, he is not totally covered by the 1st Amendment. If certain people take an interest in his internet activities, he could be seriously discommoded. So, I would not expect a categorical statement from him like we would expect from an American member.

 

[Katarina Von Bora]

Who among those behind the Declaration have denied that Jesus is God, or his resurrection?

Thanks.

I've never seen any statement that denies the Trinity. This is from their website:

Statement of Faith


CBMW Statement of Faith

· We believe that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are inspired by God and inerrant in the original writings, and that they alone are of supreme and final authority in faith and life.

· We believe there is one true God, eternally existing in three persons as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, each of whom possesses all of the attributes of deity and divine personality.

· We believe that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary, and is perfect deity and true humanity in one person forever. He lived a sinless life, died for our sins according to the Scriptures as a representative and substitutionary sacrifice, and rose from the dead in the same body in which he lived and died. He is now seated in glory at the right hand of God the Father.

Sounds pretty orthodox to me.

 

[rlvaughn]

The CBMW holds to the Arian subordination of the Son to the Father ie: heresy. This in turn informs their adherence to the subordination if women to men.

Eternal Subordination of the Son and CBMW

Thanks for explaining that you are citing them as heretics using your interpretation of certain statements that they have made, rather than offering any actual statements that they have made that Jesus is not the Son of God.

 

[McCree79]

Thanks for explaining that you are citing them as heretics using your interpretation of certain statements that they have made, rather than offering any actual statements that they have made that Jesus is not the Son of God.

Both Bruce Ware, and Wayne Grudem have been very outspoken to make it clear that Jesus is God. He is the same divine substance as the Father and Holy Spirit.
Video: Wayne Grudem Responds to His Critics - LogosTalk

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

[Matt Black]

Depends if the covenant was broken by adultery [perhaps even pornography...but another debate for another time]. Jesus did teach an "except". Paul seems to indicate if a believing spouse is abandoned by an unbelieving spouse, they are free as well.

I know of no one on this forum that holds to divorce on demand is not a sin.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

'Porneia' doesn't mean pornography but, rather, encompasses adultery, premarital sex and bestiality. Now I have to honest my breakfast as it is that time over here!

Thanks for addressing my point in terms if thus forum but how many conservative churches admit remarried divorcees to fellowship?

The con evos - individuals and churches - I know who are anti-gay seem to be much more relaxed about remarriage after divorce ie: they are far more obsessed with a topic in which Jesus said nothing than they are about a matter on which He did have something to say. And I wish that such people would be less obsessed about what two consenting adults get up to in the bedroom, causing no harm to anyone else, and redirect their anger towards the sins of injustice, poverty, violence, corporate greed, gossip, etc that actually do harm other people

 

[Matt Black]

Thanks for explaining that you are citing them as heretics using your interpretation of certain statements that they have made, rather than offering any actual statements that they have made that Jesus is not the Son of God.

I don't have a problem with them saying He is the Son of God. It's the eternal subordination that is problematic.

 

[Katarina Von Bora]

I don't have a problem with them saying He is the Son of God. It's the eternal subordination that is problematic.

What evidence do you have to support your statements? I have posted their beliefs directly from the CBMW. I don't think they subordinate Jesus in any way!

 

[Matt Black]

Well, here's an admission from their own website, hedged about with the usual "Well, lots of other people do it so that's alright then" 'justifications ': Whose Position on the Trinity is Really New?

 

[Jerome]

Anyone who has not been living under a rock knows that this Manhood/Womanhood outfit has been thoroughly chastised by other Reformed for pushing this eternal subordination scheme.

From the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals:

www.alliancenet.org/mos/1517/will-cbmw-refute-efs

regarding the doctrine of the Son’s eternal subordination to the Father....CBMW has deliberately and repeatedly built its theological support for the complementary roles of men and women upon this deeply flawed doctrine of the Trinity.

One of the more peculiar features of the current debate is the men who insist on agreement in the applications of the Bible’s teaching on the roles of men and women but allow great diversity of opinion on the nature of God....the doctrine of God is not secondary...The doctrine of God is primary. And yet some of the very men who helped lead worthy battles against attacks on Scriptural authority and substitutionary atonement seem to offer a collective shrug to views about the Trinity

 

[Jerome]

I don't think they subordinate Jesus in any way!

Sigh.

CBMW » Eternal Subordination of the Son: The Basics, Part I

What is the doctrine of the "Eternal Subordination of the Son" and why is it important for the gender debate?...

CBMW » Eternal Subordination of the Son: The Basics, Part II

in Part II of our series on the eternal subordination of the Son, we begin making a biblical case for the eternal functional authority/submission structure within the Godhead...

 

[Jerome]

From the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals site:

A Few Questions About the New CBMW Statement

"the Trinity debate, of which CBMW was of central concern...still hasn’t been dealt with....You can’t pretend that there were no problems with your whole movement and then continue to try and lead the way with a new statement. If you continue to teach harmful stereotypes and promote unorthodox teachers that are not in line with Nicene Trinitarian doctrine, you can’t be a trusted name for me no matter how many good signatures you get."

 

[McCree79]

'Porneia' doesn't mean pornography but, rather, encompasses adultery, premarital sex and bestiality. Now I have to honest my breakfast as it is that time over here!

Thanks for addressing my point in terms if thus forum but how many conservative churches admit remarried divorcees to fellowship?

The con evos - individuals and churches - I know who are anti-gay seem to be much more relaxed about remarriage after divorce ie: they are far more obsessed with a topic in which Jesus said nothing than they are about a matter on which He did have something to say. And I wish that such people would be less obsessed about what two consenting adults get up to in the bedroom, causing no harm to anyone else, and redirect their anger towards the sins of injustice, poverty, violence, corporate greed, gossip, etc that actually do harm other people

Πορνεία includes all sexual sin outside of marriage between a man and women. A generic term for all sexual sin. Pornography is surely a sin...causeing us to lust in our heart as well as self stimulation ....therefore commiting the sin.

I hope all churches admit to fellowship all repentant remarried divorced couples. Further divorce would be further sin-- That couple should acknowledge their sin and commit to each other and God. [I know others will have a different opinion here and think that couple should divorce.] As I hope they admit all repentant persons that struggle with homosexuality.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

[Reformed]

Eternal Subordination of the Son and Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology - The Aquila Report

I am a fan of the Aquila Report, a Reformed blog (trigger warning: it is a Reformed Presbyterian blog, so those Baptists that go apoplectic over anything Reformed should avoid it). Eternal Submission of the Son is not the same as Eternal Generation of the Son. The former is a danger to the Orthodox teaching on the Trinity. The latter is Orthodox in itself.

Eternal Subordination plays right into the error of the Patriarchy movement and Gothardism.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Matt Black]

Exactly.

What does a repentant divorcee look like, I wonder: taking the old spouse back?

 

[McCree79]

Exactly.

What does a repentant divorcee look like, I wonder: taking the old spouse back?

Topic for another thread. But it is a great discussion with lots of varying opinions on this board. We have a view old threads lingering about. But I you want to start a new one, I will participate.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

[McCree79]

EFS is really not the issue here, but a mere distraction. I will start a new thread on EFS...hopefully it keeps us from derailing this thread.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

[Rob_BW]

Adam4d posted a good comic on the Nashvile statement:

But it was the top comment on the comic that got me:

SJW: Why can't you be compassionate like Jesus? He was a friend of sinners.

Christian: So you're agreeing that they're sinners?

SJW: [TRIGGERED]

 

[HankD]

Might I remind everyone of the outcome of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Before one says "that's the OT".

True, but it was before the giving of the Law yet everyone knew what "wicked" meant.

Genesis 13
12 Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan, and Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain, and pitched his tent toward Sodom.
13 But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly.

Genesis 19
5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,
7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.
...
Genesis 19
23 The sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar.
24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground.

Luke 17
26 And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.


HankD

 

[Jerome]

Reacting to the Nashville mayor's objection to them appropriating the city's name for their statement, the head of this manhood/womanhood bunch explained that declarations are often named for the city where they're drawn up:

Denny Burk, Why the Nashville Statement

The Chicago Statement...the Manhattan Declaration....We were simply following a precedent

Of course, it is also common to name documents after the particular venue: church (Westminster Confession), palace (Savoy Declaration), or hotel (Hamilton Hotel Resolution) (Biltmore Program) (Waldorf Statement).

But these guys ironed out their manifesto at, get this, the "Gaylord Opryland Resort and Convention Center":

http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...tatement-and-why-people-talking-it/616064001/

 

[Yeshua1]

I believe he is refering to Grudem and Ware who say Christ was subordinate in FUNCTION (and function only), but equal in worth, value and divine being. It is a belief that upon incarnation, the son voluntarily submits to the Father to execute the plan of redemption that glorifies Christ. They call it “eternal functional subordination”.

Some have misrepresented the views of Ware and Grudem and claim they deny that Jesus is truly God.

*I will add that they view the authority of Christ as equal as well. Only in FUNCTION did Christ submit...as well as the Holy Spirit at times. The will is the same. This is also the view of Calvin and Augustine. See Calvin Institutes 2.12.2

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Jesus was only in that subordination position during the Incarnation though, as was a temp and not eternal state.