Would You Let a Known Lesbian Perform at Your Church???

You know, I watched that episode of Larry King (yeah, I know you're wondering how someone with no TV watches Larry King) and I really just felt embarrassed for her pastor.

All of us have gotten caught asleep at the switch, approving somebody for church membership who shouldn't have been, approving a baptismal candidate who shouldn't have been baptised, failing to discipline somebody who should have been disciplined, etc, so I couldn't really point a finger at him for that.

But I really would have been impressed with him if he had said, "I'm the pastor and so the buck stops with me. When Jennifer asked to be made a part of our church, we sincerely believed that she showed all of the signs of true, Biblical repentance and faith in Christ and His atonement on the cross on her behalf and met the Biblical criteria for church membership. Based on that, we chose to make her a member of our church. In the same way, we believed that she met all of the criteria of a baptismal candidate and so chose to baptise her.

However, I now understand that we were disobedient to God's word and sinned against Jennifer when we failed to exercise Biblical discipline, even though we were aware of he ongoing and unrepentant sin.

We have repented before God, both as a congregation and as the leadership of _______ Church. We, the leadership, have apologized to the church body. And now, on behalf of the church, I would like to apologize to Jennifer and ask for her forgiveness for failing to show her the love and care for her and her spiritual well being by failing to try to restore her to a right relationship with God through discipline and a call for her to repent for her sin."

 

Well, scripture does show that there are different degress of sin...thus they are not equal.

1 John 5:16-17, "Anyone who sees his brother sinning, if the sin is not deadly, should petition God, and thus life will be given to the sinner. This is only for those whose sin is not deadly. There is such a thing as a deadly sin; I do not say that one should pray about that. True, all wrongdoing is sin, but not all sin is deadly."

Matthew 26:24 (New International Version)
24The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born."

Peace!

 

These proof-texts only refer to the degree of consequences, not the actual degree of the sin. Sin is sin; it is that which comes in between us and God; it is betraying the image the we bear.

 

Well sure there are different degrees of sin. Murder is clearly a worse sin than shoplifting.

 

Back that up with Scripture please.

 

Hezekiah 18:2 Thus saith the Lord! Murder is worse the sin for you than indeed is shop lifting. :tongue3:

 

The fact that the two have different penalties shows that they are not equal sins. Justice demands just penalties ("eye for an eye, etc"). The fact that God decreed that stealing be treated differently than murder shows that they are not equal sins.

 

But the penalty for all sin is death is it not?

 

Eternally, yes, but not temporally. Furthermore, the Bible makes clear in Rev 20 that "the dead are judged out of things in the book" meaning that even in eternal death there are degrees of punishment according to the things in the books. The "books" serve no purpose if not to adjudicate just penalties according to their contents. We see that in James 3:1, where teachers are judged more harshly because of their authority.

 

That sounds catholic.

 

Interesting. Care to make a case for that? Because what I have said is probably the standard view of evangelicals. It is at least a major contender.

Remember, the "books" are compared to the "book of life." This is not a judgment for salvation, but for condemnation.

No Roman Catholic would agree with my position on this.

 

Actually I will make a case for it. It supports the purgatory view. Note that in purgatory all souls there are destined to heaven. It isn't a second chance. Note there is also prayer for the dead to forgive them of their offenses committed while alive like the book of 2 Maccabees. And then there is the differing levels of works and sins which are judged. So yes a Catholic would very much agree with your position on this.

Most evangelicals only make the distinction that the works which we do are rewarded by crowns fewer works, fewer crowns but as far as level of sins all sins are purged in the attoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ and once we drop this body it (sins) no longer is relevant.

 

Nothing in my view supports purgatory at all.

No one in the view that I have espoused is destined for heaven. Rev 20 makes it clear that they are all bound for hell.

Then you don't understand my position. My position, a standard evangelical position, is that heaven is for those saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Everyone else goes to an eternal hell, and are judged for their sins against God. There are, in hell, degrees of punishment. There is no chance for anything less than eternal hell, and no chance of going to heaven.

So a Catholic would agree in part, but not totally, and not substantively. The Catholics are right on some things. It's the things they are wrong on that are the issue.

Yes. You are talking believers here. I am not talking about believers. I am talking about unbelievers because that is what Rev 20 it talking about.

But note your inconsistency. You argue that believers have degrees of reward, but unbelievers don't have degrees of punishment. That makes no sense, particularly given the biblical revelation on this.

 

All are cast into the Lake of fire prepared for the devil and his angels. Now note. The lake of fire was made for satan. Not man. yet he suffers the same punishment despite I believe Satan to be more culpable than man.

 

I agree. But how is that relevant here? The fact that Satan receives greater punishment in hell than man does is not really at stake. The fact is that they are both in hell.

Is your argument that unbelievers don't go to the lake of fire or that Satan and unbelievers are punished equally even though Satan is more culpable?

 

No my argument is that they are both in the same lake of fire even though Satan is more culpable.

 

So then you are questioning the justice of God? You are saying that God punishes people equally even though Satan is (in your words) "more culpable."

I think you have talked yourself into a rather uncomfortable position.

If God punishes Satan equally to unbelievers, even though Satan is more culpable, then God is not just. If God does not punish them equally, then you have established my point.

While you are thinking about that, think about this:

In Luke 12:47-48, JEsus teaches that those with greater knowledge receive greater punishment; those with less knowledge receive less punishment, though they still receive punishment.

In Matt 11:22, Jesus says it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for the people in Chorazin and Bethsaida.

In Luke 20:47, he says that the scribes will receive greater condemnation.

So I think it is pretty clear that Jesus taught degrees of punishment, isn't it?

 

Question: What greater punishment? The realization they had jesus but denied him any way or do you think the heat is turned up? Greater condemenation means less excuse in my mind. Is the greater punishment self tourture which knowledge? but the fire is the same? Satan may be more culpable but he has greater knowledge and we committed the same sin. Disobedience. Non serviam.

 

I don't know. I only know what Jesus said. But I don't think it is merely mental or cognitive.

 

I don't know either. Its one of those mystery things I'm not really dogmatic about.