An IFB Pastor’s Ugly, UnChristian Comments on Homosexuality

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.

Free eBook: Christ-Centered Bible Study from Armchair-Theology.net

Check out the promotional video for what looks to be an incredibly helpful little book designed for anyone who wants to read the Bible more effectively. The booklet, Christ-Centered Bible Study, is written by Dave Moser of Armchair-Theology.net and freely available as a .pdf download.

Learn more about the book, and download your free copy here.

“The Astonishing Adventures of Missionary Max” by Andrew Comings

David Livingstone meet Indiana Jones. The famed missionary explorer and the world-renowned, cinematic adventurer come to mind as one reads Andrew Comings’ new book The Astonishing Adventures of Missionary Max (Engage Faith Press, 2012).

In a fast-paced, engaging manner, Comings masterfully weaves his tale set on the fictional island of Cabrito. Political intrigue, a mysterious past, shady villains and maniacal kingpins — the story doesn’t follow the script one imagines for a typical missionary adventure tale. And Max is no missionary-want-to-be, he comes across as a man’s man who is forced into staying on Cabrito to make a difference.

The twists and turns of the plot, characters with depth and reality, and a locale where almost anything can go, keep one guessing throughout the book. Surprises abound as we come to terms with Max’s true identity, and learn more about his newfound friends. There is a romantic angle, too, but like the rest of the book – its a little complicated. The book stays suitable for teenagers, and perhaps older elementary children, although some of the themes will be over their heads.

The story is well crafted and one wouldn’t know it is Comings’ first book from reading it. It is a work of Christian fiction, however, and this comes through with its pointed message of forgiveness and reconciliation. And Max even shares his personal testimony in one scene. Yet this aspect of the book isn’t handled in a sloppy manner, and Comings manages to keep the story from becoming preachy in a stilted sense.

Many of us want our lives to count for Christ, and we all experience the struggles that Max does as well. We may not all have a military past that haunts us, but we each have our demons. This may be why this book resonates so deeply with me. Max is an imperfect hero who’s thrust into a situation he couldn’t have foreseen. But at the end of the story we can see that God’s hand is behind bringing many of the disparate threads together.

If you’re looking for some wholesome fiction from a new and rising author, look no further than Missionary Max. I hope the work will span sequels and that it will soon be available in a print format. For now, it is available in three parts at the Amazon kindle store. Its serial release may hamper sales, but the story as a whole really is worth its salt. Help out a new author and take a look at this promising work today.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by the author for review. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

The book is available from Amazon.com (for your Kindle or on paperback).

Learn more about the book and its author (a real life missionary) at the author’s blog.

Graeme Goldsworthy on the Old Testament’s Own Typology

I’ve been reading the latest book from Graeme Goldsworthy, Christ-Centered Biblical Theology: Hermeneutical Foundations and Principles (IVP, 2012). In the book, Goldsworthy details the foundations of his hermeneutical method and the big influence that Donald Robinson, his former professor at Moore Theological College (Sydney), has had on him. One of the fascinating points he brings up about typology is that Robinson had pointed out that the Old Testament itself is rife with typology. Let me offer here an excerpt which highlights this fact and provides ample food for thought.

————————————-

The following quotation shows with absolute clarity the importance Robinson places on the notion of the recapitulation of Israel’s earlier history… in the prophetic eschatology. This is seen as the basis for the New Testament proclamation of fulfilment in Christ:

The blessings of God’s End-time are described in the Old Testament for the most part in terms drawn from Israel’s past history. The day of the Lord would be Israel’s history all over again, but new with the newness of God. There would be a new Exodus, a new redemption from slavery and a new entry into the land of promise (Jer. 16:14, 15); a new covenant and a new law (Jer. 31:31-34). No foe would invade the promised inheritance, “but they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid” (Micah 4:4). There would be a new Jerusalem (Isa. 26:1, Ez. 40) and a new David to be God’s shepherd over Israel (Jer. 23:5, Ez. 34:23,24) and a new Temple where perfect worship would be offered and from which a perfect law would go forth (Isa. 2:2-4, Ez. 40-46). It would not be too much to say that Israel’s history, imperfectly experienced in the past, would find its perfect fulfilment “in that day.” [quoted from Donald W. B. Robinson, The Hope of Christ’s Coming (Beecroft, New South Wales: Evangelical Tracts and Publications, 1958), pg. 13]

Robinson’s typology is wider than the repetition of Israel’s history in that it sees the End as transcending and fulfilling the whole history of creation. “Indeed, nothing less than a new creation, a new heaven and a new earth, could contain all that God has in store for the End (Isa. 65:17).” There is, of course, nothing particularly original in this understanding of the Old Testament prophetic eschatology. The important thing for this discussion is the way these perspectives inform Robinson’s understanding of the New Testament.

[excerpt is from pages 173-174 of Christ-Centered Biblical Theology (IVP, 2012)]

————————————-

I think this is an important point. The NT isn’t doing something totally new with seeing OT events as typological – with the fulfillment in Christ. The NT stands in a tradition of typological interpretation of OT history, and is merely identifying in a new way what or who the true antitype is.

Giving in to “Weaker Brothers”

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?