Tag: Fundamentalism

An IFB Pastor’s Ugly, UnChristian Comments on Homosexuality

~ Bob Hayton ~ 4 Comments

Pastor Charles Worley of Providence Road Baptist Church in Maiden, NC caused a national uproar over his recent comments on homosexuality. I get the feeling that this news story is only going to get bigger.

Here’s a summary of his comments in a sermon on May 13, where he is reacting to President Obama’s endorsement of gay marriage:

I figured a way out, a way to get rid of all the lesbians and queers but I couldn’t get it pass the Congress – build a great big large fence, 50 or a hundred mile long. Put all the lesbians in there, fly over and drop some food. Do the same thing with the queers and the homosexuals. And have that fence electrified so they can’t get out.

And you know what? In a few years they will die out. You know why? They can’t reproduce. If a man ever has a young’un, praise God he will be the first.

–see the youtube video clip included in this article

The pastor is not backing down, and the next Sunday apparently, his congregation was in full attendance with 100 visitors and supporters from the surrounding area. Oh, and there was the massive protest outside from gay rights groups and sympathizers as well.

In fact, one of the church members has gone on record saying that gays are worthy of death.

Let me be clear, this disgusts me. These comments are ugly, uncaring and downright unChristian. And these comments don’t help anyone. They infuriate the homosexuals (understandably), and they give credence to the idea that the Church hates homosexuals, period. Where is the grace? And how are homosexuals to be wooed to Christ with such a hate-filled message.

Someone has also unearthed a 1978 message with Worley declaring that forty years ago, gays would be hanging from a white oak tree. Underlying the words that Worley uses, seems to be a belittling of gays and homosexuals and a feeling that he is better than they are. And one could even read hate into all this – and homosexuals will justifiably see it that way.

Most conservative Christians like me, decry these statements and distance ourselves from them. But some of the recent discussions at SharperIron here and here, sadly show that many basically support this pastor’s message.

There are numerous articles available online discussing Pastor Worley’s anti-gay message and I won’t provide them all here. I just want to explain why I think he is so wrong.

The Old Testament laws against homosexuality teach us that it is immoral, just as much as the laws against sex outside of marriage do, as well. But the corporal punishment and the death penalty was broadly applied in ancient Israel to a number of crimes including homosexuality. And it is wrong to extrapolate from these old laws that God wants homosexuals to be killed today. In fact in 1 Cor. 6, the Scripture says that some of the Christians in Corinth were formerly homosexulas and that they had been washed, cleansed and sanctified – and certainly weren’t worthy of death.

Jesus Christ and his death on the cross took the full punishment of all the coporal punishment-worthy crimes in the Old Testament law. And Jesus’ message of hope and forgiveness through the Gospel is given to all who believe. The Church is spread through persuasion and love, not coercion and the sword.

We should love and welcome homosexuals as fallen sinners (like us all). Their struggles with sin are real and difficult, not to be easily dismissed out of hand. But they must forsake their sin and come to the foot of the cross for forgiveness and healing – just like all of us need to as well.

I encourage you to read my reviews of the following two books for a fuller picture of my take on homosexuality and a Bible-based, sympathetic view that sees the practice as morally wrong, but upholds those who are homosexual as people in God’s image in need of a loving Savior.

Peanut Butter Christianity

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

I recently received a new book, Retro-Christianity: Reclaiming the Forgotten Faith by Michael Svigel (Crossway, 2012). In reading through just the first couple chapters I’m humored by the author’s frequent use of analogies. Comparisons and metaphors are used with great effect in describing the problems that contemporary evangelicalism has found itself in.

Perhaps the most intriguing metaphor Svigel uses is that of “Peanut Butter Christianity.” He begins by discussing a recent trip to the grocery store to find his wife some “natural peanut butter.” He comes back with a brand name PB which includes sugar, palm oil and salt in addition to peanuts, and we pick up his story in the excerpt below:

Shouldn’t peanut butter made of just puréed peanuts serve as the standard for what constitutes natural peanut butter?

…If I were to liken the authentic, classic Christianity to the truly natural form of undiluted, unmixed, real peanut butter, then the multiple forms of evangelicalism that diverge more and more from this standard become, well, less and less authentic.

What I’m suggesting is this: over the last several decades, many of us evangelicals have become increasingly accustomed to a less “natural” form of Christianity. While still essentially Christian, many aspects of evangelicalism have become victims of “enrichment” by non-Christian ingredients that are meant to enhance the faith. This “enrichment” has been done to make the gospel more convenient, palatable, or marketable. Yet as these added ingredients take up more and more space, the essentials of the faith are necessarily displaced.

Take a stroll with me through the virtual aisles of our evangelical subculture–gift shops, radio stations, television programs, websites, even many of the new, trendy churches. We find ourselves surrounded by positive thinking, self-help, and behavior modification. We’re lured in by self-esteem best sellers, do-it-yourself Christianity, and countless authors presenting the spiritual life as an ascending ladder: seven steps to this, three keys to that, the one prayer that will revolutionize your world, expand your influence, fulfill your desire for happiness. Let’s just be honest. Much of the garbage stinking up the shelves of Christian bookstores is passed off as Christian Living, but it’s mostly psycho-babble or practical proverbs no better than what we find in the secular self-help or generic spirituality sections of our online booksellers.

Modern evangelical Christians who have become accustomed to this trendy, diluted form of Christianity have all but forgotten what the pure faith actually tastes like! In fact, many who are then exposed to a less adulterated faith–a form without all the unnecessary additives–find themselves actually disgusted by the original pure flavor of authentic Christianity, spitting it out and rejecting it as something foreign and inferior–or at least unpleasant to the palate.

The irony is that this purer form of Christianity is the authentic faith once for all delivered to the saints.  The biblical gospel proclaimed, the sacraments rightly administered, discipline properly maintained, evangelism and discipleship emphasized, repentance and renewal preached–there is nothing really fancy about these things.  In fact, they are so simple to identify and maintain that churches focusing on these fundamentals and freeing themselves from the frills appear to be washed-out has-beens or incompetent wannabes to most big-production glitz-and-glamour evangelicals.

…many forms of evangelical Christianity have been so colored with dyes, so mixed with artificial ingredients, or so drenched in candy coating that they are in danger of becoming cheap imitations that serve merely to distract from–not point to–the essential ingredients of the historical faith.

Just like additive-rich peanut butters that appeal to flavor rather than to nutrition, far too many evangelicals shop for me-centered, feel-good church experiences rather than Christ-centered worship, discipleship, and authentic community. In fact, like sour-faced kids who reject all-natural peanut butter, many evangelicals turn their noses away from authentic expressions of church and spirituality. They would rather keep dabbling in the artificial than adjust their tastes to the real thing. (pp. 29-31)

Learn more about Retro-Christianity at RetroChristianity.org, or pick up the book at Amazon.com, Westminster Bookstore or direct from Crossway.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by Crossway publishers. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

Giving in to “Weaker Brothers”

~ Bob Hayton ~ 8 Comments

I came across an interesting post that raises a good question. Is it really okay to modify your actions based on the weaker consciences of some?

Here’s the post:

In 1857 a few white members of the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa asked permission to celebrate the Lord’s Supper separately from their black brothers and sisters. The General Assembly believed their request was wrong, but it acquiesced “due to the weakness of some.” This concession soon became the norm, as white Christians increasingly chose to observe the Lord’s Supper without their black siblings. Their racism prompted the unwanted black Christians to leave and start their own churches. And so the South African church, divided by race, eventually became a vocal supporter of apartheid. In 1924 the DRC argued that the races must remain separate, for “competition between black and white on economic levels…leads to poverty, friction, misunderstanding, suspicion, and bitterness.”

How might the history of South Africa be different if the church had not conceded to the sinful request of a few “weaker brothers”? We are thankful for leaders such as Nelson Mandela who gave their lives to end apartheid. But it’s a shame on the church that their sacrifice was even needed.

Peter gave in to the “weaker brothers” in Antioch. He knew they were wrong to insist that Gentiles live like Jews, but afraid of what they might say, he refused to eat with Gentiles when these Judaizers came to town. Paul recognized this was a big deal, for the reason these Jews split from the Gentiles put the gospel at risk. How would the history of Christianity be different if Paul had not stood up to Peter’s shameful concession?

It’s never right to do wrong because others think it’s right. We must not violate our conscience on the flimsy ground that “They wouldn’t understand,” “It’s what they expect,” or “Just this once, what will it hurt?” It may seem easier to give in, but our concession will make life harder down the road.

–Read the original post from Mike Wittmer

I think you can definitely get in trouble if you’re always giving in to “weaker brothers”. It’s one thing to aim not to offend, it’s quite another to live your life with the weaker brother always potentially popping up at every turn.

What do you think? Is Mike Witmer way off base here? Am I?

Dr. Bruce Ware on Fundamentalism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 1 Comment

I recently came across an interview of Dr. Bruce Ware, one of the professors at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville. And 25 minutes of the interview was devoted to his thoughts on Fundamentalism and the differences between Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism. [HT: Andy Naselli]

I appreciated his explanation of Evangelicalism and generally agree with his characterization of the differing mindsets of the two movements. You’ll find the clip of this portion of the interview below, but there’s a lot more to the interview. I’m interested in your thoughts on this clip. I find myself basically in agreement with most of what Ware says.

Revisiting Wine and Gladness

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

It’s been six years since I posted my thoughts on wine, in one of my most read posts. In “Wine to Gladden the Heart of Man”: Thoughts on God’s Good Gift of Wine I traced out the connection that I believe the Old Testament makes between wine and joy, and why I think that indicates that enjoying a glass of wine is permissible (and even recommended) for a Christian.

Over the years since, I’ve further developed and fine-tuned my position on this controversial topic. And I’ve appreciated anew the position of many that drinking wine should be avoided for various wisdom issues related to interacting with our culture. But my basic position still stands. I believe that Scripture praises wine, with it’s joy-producing qualities (a relaxed, calmed mind and uplifted heart) as a good gift from God for mankind. God gave us this for our good, but like many of God’s other gifts (food, sex, etc.) we abuse it and suffer the consequences. We can enjoy the gift of wine without sinfully abusing it and becoming intoxicated (or drunk). Drunkenness is sin, not a disease; but Christians can responsibly enjoy wine without getting drunk (which is sinful and wrong). I have never come close to being drunk, but I have learned to appreciate the gift of wine.

I bring this up because over at Sharper Iron last week, Aaron Blumer posted a response to my article. His post is titled “The True Gladness of Wine,” and takes dead aim right at my central thesis. I respect his careful argumentation and clear position. He is gracious and fair, and he agrees with the majority of scholarship in holding that the vast majority of the instances where the word wine is used in Scripture is referring to alcoholic wine. But I don’t believe he successfully undercuts my primary thesis which I will summarize below. I’m only now responding on my blog, but I have participated in the comments on his post. You can read the 100+ comments over there and follow the whole exchange (which has been more charitable and instructive compared to other such comment threads). Before I proceed with the rest of this post, however, I want to stress that in over 1,000 published posts here at Fundamentally Reformed, this will be only the 10th post devoted to the topic. This isn’t the most important topic facing the church at large and I refuse to make it my hobby horse of choice. Still, from time to time I do discuss the issue because it is important. And everyone should take time to think through their position on this matter.

Rather than rehashing the back and forth from Sharper Iron, or summarizing and then critiquing Aaron’s post, I thought I would just detail here the connection between wine and joy, and why I think that the joy produced by wine is related to the alcoholic properties of wine. My primary point is that God teaches us that the alcoholic properties of wine were intended to be a blessing (which can be abused in violation of God’s will for us).

Wine and Joy

Before I begin, I want to stress that the evils of drunkenness are too large and real to be ignored and I agree that abstinence is one very reasonable way of dealing with that. But for me, it was Scripture’s teaching on wine which compelled me to pick up a glass and experience the joy of wine first hand. I felt like I was denigrating a God-created substance through my views on it and my cultural taboo that I held about it–I was placing reason and experience above Scripture. Everyone needs to think through this for themselves, and my liberty should not require others to partake of wine. But let me try to show why I think the teaching of Scripture on wine and gladness is so persuasive an argument for drinking wine in moderation.

Consider the following verses:

Wine and Gladness

But the vine said to them, ‘Shall I leave my wine that cheers God and men and go hold sway over the trees?’ (Judges 9:13)

You cause the grass to grow for the livestock and plants for man to cultivate, that he may bring forth food from the earth and wine to gladden the heart of man, oil to make his face shine and bread to strengthen man’s heart. (Ps. 104:14-15)

Go, eat your bread with joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart, for God has already approved what you do. (Eccl. 9:7)

Bread is made for laughter, and wine gladdens life, and money answers everything. (Eccl. 10:19)

The wine mourns, the vine languishes, all the merry-hearted sigh. (Isaiah 24:7, see also vs. 8-11 and Is. 16:10)

Then Ephraim shall become like a mighty warrior, and their hearts shall be glad as with wine. Their children shall see it and be glad; their hearts shall rejoice in the LORD. (Zechariah 10:7)

Drunkenness and a Merry Heart

And when their hearts were merry, they said, “Call Samson, that he may entertain us.” So they called Samson out of the prison, and he entertained them. They made him stand between the pillars. (Judges 16:25)

And Abigail came to Nabal, and behold, he was holding a feast in his house, like the feast of a king. And Nabal’s heart was merry within him, for he was very drunk. So she told him nothing at all until the morning light. In the morning, when the wine had gone out of Nabal, his wife told him these things, and his heart died within him, and he became as a stone. (1 Sam. 25:36)

Then Absalom commanded his servants, “Mark when Amnon’s heart is merry with wine, and when I say to you, ‘Strike Amnon,’ then kill him. Do not fear; have I not commanded you? Be courageous and be valiant.” (2 Samuel 13:28 )

On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine, he commanded Mehuman, Biztha, Harbona, Bigtha and Abagtha, Zethar and Carkas, the seven eunuchs who served in the presence of King Ahasuerus, (Esther 1:10)

While they are inflamed I will prepare them a feast and make them drunk, that they may become merry, then sleep a perpetual sleep and not wake, declares the Lord. (Jeremiah 51:39)

There are a host of additional passages and verses that establish a connection between wine and joy, and loss of wine and loss of joy. My original post details those. What the second set of verses above establish, however, is that a merry heart is specifically connected with drunkenness. There is a specific kind of joy or merriness that is organically caused by wine. So wine and joy don’t just go together like peas in a pod (in that culture without lots of healthy beverage choices), instead there is a causal connection between wine and joy. The wine is causing people to have a merry heart in a particular sort of way.

1 Sam. 25:36 and Jeremiah 51:39 are most clear in establishing this connection. But I argue that a full-blown merry heart (complete with drunken stupor) does not have to result from “drink[ing] your wine with a merry heart.” In fact, Ps. 104:15 again takes center stage in this. God gave wine specifically to “gladden” our hearts. It causes merriment to happen. A relaxed and uplifted spirit, which is the experience of drinking wine after just a few sips, certainly is a joyous thing. And this is why wine is connected with feasting in Scripture and in so many other medieval (and older) cultures. Festal joy and festal drink go hand in hand. Yes there is joy that isn’t caused by the wine, but the wine adds its own joy. This is why (I believe) the joys of harvest and good food go together with wine often in some of the joy passages. But more than merely joy at the harvest or joy from the food is in view. The wine gives a joy of its own which enhances the entire experience.

So I posit a causal role for wine. Wine causes merriness (the sort that is displayed by drunken people, as well as other sorts of merriness). And this very merriment-inducing quality is what God praises. It is in this light that we should read the passages in the first list, like Judges 9:13 and Ps. 104:15.

Wine in Bible times

My thesis is aided by the general consensus that fermented wine was definitely being partaken of in the Bible times. In the OT, we don’t see evidence of wine being diluted (see Is. 1:22), that came about only later. Later, Greek and Roman cultures praised diluted wine and Jewish culture eventually followed suit. Yet even with diluted wine, the average ratio would put the alcoholic content at around 2.5 or 3.5% (by comparison the average beer sold has between 3.2 and 4% alcoholic content). But with all the passages above, my point here is that fermented drink was definitely in view. For more on this point, see my post “Isaiah 16:10 and the Two-Wine Theory.”

Additional Points

Before I conclude, consider three final points.

First, there are a few passages which speak clearly of alcoholic wine in one verse, and a few verses later wine is referred to in a positive light. Nothing indicates we should assume that the wine was different in the case of the alcoholic variety and the variety which is praised. In 1 Sam. 1:14, Eli tells Hannah to “put your wine away from [her]“. But in vs. 24, Hannah brings wine with her on her trip back to Shiloh. Nothing indicates that the wine Hannah brought would be different than the wine Eli thought she was drinking earlier. In 1 Sam. 25:18, Abigail serves wine for David and his men, then later in verses 36-37 Nabal is drunk with wine. Nothing in the context would lead us to think the drink David and his men received was different from that which made Nabal drunk. The difference of course is Nabal immoderately drank the wine, whereas David and his men didn’t. Joel 1:5, 10 is another similar passage.

Second, Scripture clearly praises alcoholic wine. Isaiah 25:6 is definitely referring to alcoholic wine when it indicates that such wine will characterize the blessings of Christ’s future kingdom: “And in this mountain the LORD of hosts will make for all people a feast of choice pieces, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of well-refined wines on the lees. (NKJV) “. “Wines on the lees” is translated in most modern versions as “well-aged wine”.

Third, Nehemiah when describing what supplies were given to him as Judean governor, mentions all kinds of wines. Nothing indicates that he did not partake of them. And the context is one of approval, as he is writing inspired Scripture. Here is the passage: “Now what was prepared at my expense for each day was one ox and six choice sheep and birds, and every ten days all kinds of wine in abundance. Yet for all this I did not demand the food allowance of the governor, because the service was too heavy on this people.” (Neh. 5:18 ) So if there is two kinds of wine, this passage indicates Nehemiah partook of both.

I think the preponderance of evidence is in favor of my conclusion – which the majority of the church down through the ages has also held to. I conclude that the moderate enjoyment of alcoholic drinks is something God has intended for our good. God gave wine to man for our good and for the temporary relief of stress and other health benefits that it brings – and to give us the joy that we have when we drink good wine with good friends and people. This festal joy was God’s gift to man and God designed all of this when he created the natural fermentation process and the gift of wine.

If you want to read more on this topic, I’d encourage you to peruse my other posts on wine. And if you’re brave, you can dig through all the comments (there’s quite a few debates preserved there).