I agree that we in the CRC ought to do more to inform ourselves, from a Scriptural perspective, about Climate Change. But my focus is a little different...
It is clear that environment & climate was a common theme among many of the demon-gods of antiquity (the false idols worshipped by people who did not worship the One True God). The other 2 main themes were child sacrifice and sexual immorality. Those 3 things, deification of elements of the environment, child sacrifice, and sexual perversion were the 3 main aspects of demon worship.
I believe that the CRC has been tempted to flirt with the environmental idol. The "science" offered to pass the overture that jumped on board the global warming bandwagon has been proven to be false. And I think the environment (pun intended) within the CRC has changed a lot since then.
I hope that a future Synod will refocus our denomination away from the demon-god of environmentalism, and back toward the One True God of Scripture.
Saul (pre-conversion) is a fantastic example of someone whose orthodoxy was all wrong. Saul's beliefs were based on falsehood. He did not understand that Jesus is the long-promised Messiah of Israel. This is the mystery of the Gospel that Paul (post-conversion) refers to in his letters to the churches.
I think that is why Paul is so critical of false teachers and false teachings. He himself used to be a false teacher who believed in false teachings.
But once Paul got his orthodoxy correct, he was able to spread the truth of the Gospel in love. Love radiated from his right beliefs!
I am thankful for parents who raised me to realize that there is 1 race...the human race. And that God created all of us brown. Some of us are light brown. Some of us are dark brown. But in the end, we are all brown!
We need to see each other the way God sees us: as individuals created in His image. Not as members of artificial groups based on our DNA.
Those who wish to divide us (and profit from that division) based on our skin tone, must be opposed as deniers of the true Gospel of Christ. That Gospel teaches us that people who harbor animosity based on skin tone (whether dark-toward-light or light-toward-dark) will be forgiven by Almighty God when they accept God's call to the Cross and leave their animosity there for Christ to destroy for all eternity. Man-made schemes will not bring forgiveness and reconciliation. Only the True Gospel can do that!
Hi Nick. Our CRC Church Order literally states that delegates to Synod "represent" the churches in their Classis.
Someone at our Classis meeting (Classis Georgetown) a few weeks ago expressed the same opinion you did. I read, word for word, from our Church Order to show otherwise.
Article 45 "The Synod" states "Synod is the assembly representing the churches of all the classes."
Galen, you seem to be trying to split the meaning here, and argue that while Synod as a whole body represents the churches, the individual delegates do not represent anyone. If that is your assertion, so be it. Such an interpretation seems silly. It would be like saying that Congress represents the States, but individual members of Congress do not represent anyone. Or that attendees at an awards ceremony (like the Oscars) represent the collective body of work of whatever is being considered for awards (like all movies made), but that the individual attendees (like the actors and producers) don't represent any specific work.
There is a mistaken idea floating around that a representative body cannot also be deliberative, that somehow those two things are mutually-exclusive. That is obviously not correct. An assembly like Synod is both representative of the churches, and deliberative in nature.
I think the reason people put forth this false narrative is that they are hoping to sway individual delegates to "go rogue" if you will, and act far more revisionist and Progressive than their constituent churches would like them to.
For sure, Kathy. "Going rogue" can go either way. Personally, I would love to see the 4 delegates from Classis Grand Rapids East stand up at Synod and say "Our classis is wrong; Scripture is correct, and we need to abide by God's design for marriage and human sexuality." That would be wonderful!
Realistically, most delegates are going to be a mixture of representative of their church, and independent agent. The main thing is that they adhere closely to the Word of God and our denomination's teachings.
It would be wonderful if our denominational shepherds spoke clearly and powerfully, condemning sin and calling us to embrace the righteousness of Christ through the Holy Spirit.
Instead they seem to believe that obedience to God and love for neighbor are mutually exclusive. (Or rather, they claim the moral high ground of “love” for neighbor as an excuse to disobey God.)
Scripture is full of warnings to religious leaders who are supposed to follow God’s commands and teach them to their sheep, but instead they lead the sheep astray.
“My people have been lost sheep; their shepherds have led them astray and caused them to roam on the mountains.” (Jeremiah 50:6)
“Their vine comes from the vine of Sodom and from the fields of Gomorrah. Their grapes are filled with poison, and their clusters with bitterness.” (Deuteronomy 32:32-33)
“They strengthen the hands of evildoers, so that not one of them turns from their wickedness. They are like Sodom to me; the people of Jerusalem are like Gomorrah.” (Jeremiah 23:14)
To Kevin, Mark, Reggie, and all the others who support changing the definition of marriage and changing the teachings of the CRC regarding sexual immorality, please consider this question...
Why not join one of the other Christian denominations that ALREADY teach your new-found beliefs?
I ask that question in love and grace. If your ideas change and no longer line up with your church's teachings, isn't it better to leave that church, and join another one that lines up with your new beliefs? Why do you need to force the original denomination to change her teachings to match your new ones?
Steven, the Scriptures I shared are not about Sodom, per se. They are about current religious leaders going along with the "wisdom" of the world, encouraging the sheep to go astray, and even celebrating sin.
It's a warning...when church leaders turn the flock away from God, God is not pleased.
Steven, you've made some assumptions that are completely wrong. But I love you as my neighbor anyway.
My question for you is this: If your views on sexual immorality have changed and no longer line up with the teachings of the CRC, why not graciously join another denomination that already DOES line up with your new viewpoint?
Thanks, Kevin. You covered a lot, but seemed to assume I meant an official split of the CRC. I didn't mean that. There are plenty of other churches and denominations that already exist, who line up with your views on sexual immorality. I was asking why you don't join one of those?
About 10 years ago I joined the CRC because I personally hold to the teachings of the CRC. If, for some reason, I found new views (say, for example, I came to believe in universal salvation), then I would join a different church that already teaches that. I would not demand that the CRC start teaching universal salvation.
It's like someone who hates baseball, who becomes a little league coach, and then demands that the kids stop playing baseball.
Posted in: Survey Results: Leading the Way in Faith-Driven Climate Action
I agree that we in the CRC ought to do more to inform ourselves, from a Scriptural perspective, about Climate Change. But my focus is a little different...
It is clear that environment & climate was a common theme among many of the demon-gods of antiquity (the false idols worshipped by people who did not worship the One True God). The other 2 main themes were child sacrifice and sexual immorality. Those 3 things, deification of elements of the environment, child sacrifice, and sexual perversion were the 3 main aspects of demon worship.
I believe that the CRC has been tempted to flirt with the environmental idol. The "science" offered to pass the overture that jumped on board the global warming bandwagon has been proven to be false. And I think the environment (pun intended) within the CRC has changed a lot since then.
I hope that a future Synod will refocus our denomination away from the demon-god of environmentalism, and back toward the One True God of Scripture.
Posted in: Survey Results: Leading the Way in Faith-Driven Climate Action
Mark, does Scripture tell us to "care for creation"? Where? Or are we instructed to use it for our own flourishing, and give thanks to God for it?
Yes, to the extent that global warming alarmism is preached by Christians, it is idolatry and false religion.
I would love to meet with you and talk more about this. Will you be at Synod this year? I will be there as a delegate.
Posted in: No Such Thing as "Loveless Orthodoxy"
Saul (pre-conversion) is a fantastic example of someone whose orthodoxy was all wrong. Saul's beliefs were based on falsehood. He did not understand that Jesus is the long-promised Messiah of Israel. This is the mystery of the Gospel that Paul (post-conversion) refers to in his letters to the churches.
I think that is why Paul is so critical of false teachers and false teachings. He himself used to be a false teacher who believed in false teachings.
But once Paul got his orthodoxy correct, he was able to spread the truth of the Gospel in love. Love radiated from his right beliefs!
Posted in: Standing Up to Racism: The Gospel Thing to Do
I am thankful for parents who raised me to realize that there is 1 race...the human race. And that God created all of us brown. Some of us are light brown. Some of us are dark brown. But in the end, we are all brown!
We need to see each other the way God sees us: as individuals created in His image. Not as members of artificial groups based on our DNA.
Those who wish to divide us (and profit from that division) based on our skin tone, must be opposed as deniers of the true Gospel of Christ. That Gospel teaches us that people who harbor animosity based on skin tone (whether dark-toward-light or light-toward-dark) will be forgiven by Almighty God when they accept God's call to the Cross and leave their animosity there for Christ to destroy for all eternity. Man-made schemes will not bring forgiveness and reconciliation. Only the True Gospel can do that!
Posted in: Talking About Human Sexuality With Love
Hi Nick. Our CRC Church Order literally states that delegates to Synod "represent" the churches in their Classis.
Someone at our Classis meeting (Classis Georgetown) a few weeks ago expressed the same opinion you did. I read, word for word, from our Church Order to show otherwise.
Posted in: Talking About Human Sexuality With Love
Article 45 "The Synod" states "Synod is the assembly representing the churches of all the classes."
Galen, you seem to be trying to split the meaning here, and argue that while Synod as a whole body represents the churches, the individual delegates do not represent anyone. If that is your assertion, so be it. Such an interpretation seems silly. It would be like saying that Congress represents the States, but individual members of Congress do not represent anyone. Or that attendees at an awards ceremony (like the Oscars) represent the collective body of work of whatever is being considered for awards (like all movies made), but that the individual attendees (like the actors and producers) don't represent any specific work.
There is a mistaken idea floating around that a representative body cannot also be deliberative, that somehow those two things are mutually-exclusive. That is obviously not correct. An assembly like Synod is both representative of the churches, and deliberative in nature.
I think the reason people put forth this false narrative is that they are hoping to sway individual delegates to "go rogue" if you will, and act far more revisionist and Progressive than their constituent churches would like them to.
Posted in: Talking About Human Sexuality With Love
For sure, Kathy. "Going rogue" can go either way. Personally, I would love to see the 4 delegates from Classis Grand Rapids East stand up at Synod and say "Our classis is wrong; Scripture is correct, and we need to abide by God's design for marriage and human sexuality." That would be wonderful!
Realistically, most delegates are going to be a mixture of representative of their church, and independent agent. The main thing is that they adhere closely to the Word of God and our denomination's teachings.
Posted in: Talking About Human Sexuality With Love
It would be wonderful if our denominational shepherds spoke clearly and powerfully, condemning sin and calling us to embrace the righteousness of Christ through the Holy Spirit.
Instead they seem to believe that obedience to God and love for neighbor are mutually exclusive. (Or rather, they claim the moral high ground of “love” for neighbor as an excuse to disobey God.)
Scripture is full of warnings to religious leaders who are supposed to follow God’s commands and teach them to their sheep, but instead they lead the sheep astray.
“My people have been lost sheep; their shepherds have led them astray and caused them to roam on the mountains.” (Jeremiah 50:6)
“Their vine comes from the vine of Sodom and from the fields of Gomorrah. Their grapes are filled with poison, and their clusters with bitterness.” (Deuteronomy 32:32-33)
“They strengthen the hands of evildoers, so that not one of them turns from their wickedness. They are like Sodom to me; the people of Jerusalem are like Gomorrah.” (Jeremiah 23:14)
Posted in: Talking About Human Sexuality With Love
To Kevin, Mark, Reggie, and all the others who support changing the definition of marriage and changing the teachings of the CRC regarding sexual immorality, please consider this question...
Why not join one of the other Christian denominations that ALREADY teach your new-found beliefs?
I ask that question in love and grace. If your ideas change and no longer line up with your church's teachings, isn't it better to leave that church, and join another one that lines up with your new beliefs? Why do you need to force the original denomination to change her teachings to match your new ones?
Posted in: Talking About Human Sexuality With Love
Steven, the Scriptures I shared are not about Sodom, per se. They are about current religious leaders going along with the "wisdom" of the world, encouraging the sheep to go astray, and even celebrating sin.
It's a warning...when church leaders turn the flock away from God, God is not pleased.
Posted in: Talking About Human Sexuality With Love
Steven, you've made some assumptions that are completely wrong. But I love you as my neighbor anyway.
My question for you is this: If your views on sexual immorality have changed and no longer line up with the teachings of the CRC, why not graciously join another denomination that already DOES line up with your new viewpoint?
Posted in: Talking About Human Sexuality With Love
Thanks, Kevin. You covered a lot, but seemed to assume I meant an official split of the CRC. I didn't mean that. There are plenty of other churches and denominations that already exist, who line up with your views on sexual immorality. I was asking why you don't join one of those?
About 10 years ago I joined the CRC because I personally hold to the teachings of the CRC. If, for some reason, I found new views (say, for example, I came to believe in universal salvation), then I would join a different church that already teaches that. I would not demand that the CRC start teaching universal salvation.
It's like someone who hates baseball, who becomes a little league coach, and then demands that the kids stop playing baseball.