Comments for From Law to Grace http://fromlaw2grace.com When worlds collide: Discussing the intersection of law, religion, and politics in culture and Baptist life. Fri, 18 May 2012 23:18:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 Comment on SBC, GCB & the De Facto Name Change Charade by Tim Rogers http://fromlaw2grace.com/2012/05/17/sbc-gcb-the-de-facto-name-change-charade/#comment-18693 Tim Rogers Fri, 18 May 2012 23:18:40 +0000 http://fromlaw2grace.com/?p=3659#comment-18693 Brother Howell, Just a tidbit you may be interested in. Dr. Thom Rainer wrote a book entitled "Surprising Insights from the Unchurched". It is an interesting read and the thesis of the book is that the "formerly unchurched provide us insights that we have not previously heard." Dr Rainer studied churches over a six year period for his group. He found there were a number of myths we churched people had and it was debunked by these formerly unchurched. One of the myths we were buying into is the denominational name means something to the unchurhed. You need to read about this myth. It is found on page 38 n his book.When asked "Did the name of the church influence your decision to join?" the formerly unchurhed answered "No", to the tune of 81%. What is even more interesting is the 19% that stated the name of the church did affect their decision they found that 12% said it affected their decision positively to know the name of the denominational affiliation in the name of the church. Thus, we have a huge discrepancy in the information about the people who we are trying to reach. I would place more stock on the Rainer research as he researched people that were once unchurched and made a decision to become a part of the church. All other research is based on people that have not made decisions to join a church. Brother Howell,

Just a tidbit you may be interested in. Dr. Thom Rainer wrote a book entitled “Surprising Insights from the Unchurched”. It is an interesting read and the thesis of the book is that the “formerly unchurched provide us insights that we have not previously heard.” Dr Rainer studied churches over a six year period for his group. He found there were a number of myths we churched people had and it was debunked by these formerly unchurched. One of the myths we were buying into is the denominational name means something to the unchurhed. You need to read about this myth. It is found on page 38 n his book.When asked “Did the name of the church influence your decision to join?” the formerly unchurhed answered “No”, to the tune of 81%. What is even more interesting is the 19% that stated the name of the church did affect their decision they found that 12% said it affected their decision positively to know the name of the denominational affiliation in the name of the church.

Thus, we have a huge discrepancy in the information about the people who we are trying to reach. I would place more stock on the Rainer research as he researched people that were once unchurched and made a decision to become a part of the church. All other research is based on people that have not made decisions to join a church.

]]> Comment on SBC, GCB & the De Facto Name Change Charade by Howell Scott http://fromlaw2grace.com/2012/05/17/sbc-gcb-the-de-facto-name-change-charade/#comment-18648 Howell Scott Fri, 18 May 2012 14:06:31 +0000 http://fromlaw2grace.com/?p=3659#comment-18648 Lydia, You maybe right that the deck is stacked. In one way it is. Much like an incumbent President has certain perks and privileges that give him certain advantages in a re-election campaign, those in power within the SBC also have advantages going into NOLA. However, those advantages -- hopefully in the case of President Obama and the current SBC leadership -- can be muted so that the opponents can win the day. As I wrote in the post, I believe that those on the Task Force (and perhaps others outside the TF) knew full well that they would not have the votes to win a supermajority at two consecutive Conventions. Notwithstanding the legal challenges, the vote count would never have been favorable. That is one reason why I believe that they came up with the nick name proposal, which is a de facto name change. As such, it should still require a 2/3 majority vote at two consecutive Conventions. This will not be required and only a simple majority will be needed to pass the recommendation. A parliamentary challenge could be made to this process, but the Chair (Bryant Wright) would not recognize the challenge or rule the challenge out of order. A motion to "appeal the ruling of the chair" could be made, which would need to carry by a simple majority. We would see at that point, as opposed to actually voting on the recommendation, how much support this thing has. I suspect that the TF believes they will have the votes to pass it. Even if it passes by a bare majority, what does that say about the unity that Max mentioned above? Just like churches which make changes based only on votes and without a clear consensus brought by the Holy Spirit, this vote may lead to "hope and change," but it will not lead to unity within the Convention. Thanks for your thoughts on this. Have a great day and God bless, Howell Lydia,

You maybe right that the deck is stacked. In one way it is. Much like an incumbent President has certain perks and privileges that give him certain advantages in a re-election campaign, those in power within the SBC also have advantages going into NOLA. However, those advantages — hopefully in the case of President Obama and the current SBC leadership — can be muted so that the opponents can win the day. As I wrote in the post, I believe that those on the Task Force (and perhaps others outside the TF) knew full well that they would not have the votes to win a supermajority at two consecutive Conventions. Notwithstanding the legal challenges, the vote count would never have been favorable. That is one reason why I believe that they came up with the nick name proposal, which is a de facto name change. As such, it should still require a 2/3 majority vote at two consecutive Conventions. This will not be required and only a simple majority will be needed to pass the recommendation.

A parliamentary challenge could be made to this process, but the Chair (Bryant Wright) would not recognize the challenge or rule the challenge out of order. A motion to “appeal the ruling of the chair” could be made, which would need to carry by a simple majority. We would see at that point, as opposed to actually voting on the recommendation, how much support this thing has. I suspect that the TF believes they will have the votes to pass it. Even if it passes by a bare majority, what does that say about the unity that Max mentioned above? Just like churches which make changes based only on votes and without a clear consensus brought by the Holy Spirit, this vote may lead to “hope and change,” but it will not lead to unity within the Convention. Thanks for your thoughts on this. Have a great day and God bless,

Howell

]]> Comment on SBC, GCB & the De Facto Name Change Charade by Max http://fromlaw2grace.com/2012/05/17/sbc-gcb-the-de-facto-name-change-charade/#comment-18647 Max Fri, 18 May 2012 13:54:37 +0000 http://fromlaw2grace.com/?p=3659#comment-18647 "This is not the same group of independent minded thinkers I grew up around in the SBC ... who embraced a true Priesthood." Lydia - You speak of a former time when Southern Baptist doctrines of soul competency and priesthood of the believer (singular) flowed naturally in our ranks. Don't you know?! Everything must change now!! Theology, identity, and mission must adapt for the sake of unity ... a card that will indeed be played at NOLA. Note: I say this reluctantly, because I know that God commands the blessing to be where there is unity. But before we get there again (if we get there), divisive beliefs and practices must be dealt with effectively. This ain't no social club whose members are acting up ... this is the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S. and we've lost our way. Changing our name won't help until we've changed our hearts ... and only God can do that IF we humble ourselves, pray and turn from our wicked ways. I would like to see a task force assembled at NOLA on that front! “This is not the same group of independent minded thinkers I grew up around in the SBC … who embraced a true Priesthood.”

Lydia – You speak of a former time when Southern Baptist doctrines of soul competency and priesthood of the believer (singular) flowed naturally in our ranks. Don’t you know?! Everything must change now!! Theology, identity, and mission must adapt for the sake of unity … a card that will indeed be played at NOLA. Note: I say this reluctantly, because I know that God commands the blessing to be where there is unity. But before we get there again (if we get there), divisive beliefs and practices must be dealt with effectively.

This ain’t no social club whose members are acting up … this is the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S. and we’ve lost our way. Changing our name won’t help until we’ve changed our hearts … and only God can do that IF we humble ourselves, pray and turn from our wicked ways. I would like to see a task force assembled at NOLA on that front!

]]> Comment on Andy Stanley’s Perplexing Silence Far From Golden by Chris L http://fromlaw2grace.com/2012/05/08/andy-stanleys-perplexing-silence-far-from-golden/#comment-18592 Chris L Fri, 18 May 2012 03:43:04 +0000 http://fromlaw2grace.com/?p=3625#comment-18592 Well, I guess I should have just taken the uncharitable view, then. . Unless someone wants to become a Christian, there is no need for us to try and force them to follow the rules only expected of Christians. Heck, we do a poor enough job *within* the church, why should we try to put those outside the church on a "sin-management" plan? . <i>My need to know is the same as thousands of others who are asking “what does NorthPoint actually believe?”</i> . I other words, unless they are members (or want to become a member), they have no need, whatsoever. Thank you. Should you actually desire an answer, you will listen to the series. If not, you'll just gripe about it and claim to do the whole sanctimonious "be a Berean" routine. I get it. . <i>Homosexuals need to know this also. Are they going to go to NorthPoint and hear that they are living in a lifestyle condoned by the church, or does this church believe the Bible to be God’s Word and what it says about homosexuality is that it is an abomination.</i> . You see, you have actually touched on why I hope Andy never answers the question in a public forum. Part of the problem is that the word "homosexual" is conflated to mean both a) someone who is attracted to people of the same sex; and b) someone who is engaged in homosexual practice with other people. "Homosexuality" is the same way. . This confusion occurs both with Christians (like yourself) and non-Christians, alike. So, when you say that "homosexuality is an abomination" (or expect that to be taught), what the homosexual (non-practicing and practicing, alike) hears is "you are an abomination to God". . In our culture, one's sexual preference is ingrained as inseparable from one's core identity. This is completely unlike any other sin. Someone who is tempted to steal is not a thief, unless they actually are committing theft. Someone who is tempted to commit adultery is not an adulterer unless they commit adultery. But someone who is attracted to people of the same sex are homosexuals, whether or not they act on their temptations. . SO - it is quite easy for believers to say things that are terribly insensitive: as you just did, by seeming to declare that homosexuals, practicing or not, are abominations to God. I hope you did not mean it that way, but that is how most unbelieving homosexuals would read what you just wrote. It is also easy to get into arguments about things that have no bearing whatsoever on the situation (like whether or not the proclivity for SSA is or is not genetic). . Thus, a wise pastor in today's society will say little or nothing publicly about homosexuality, but they will be willing to discuss it with those who are actually struggling with it. At least they will do so if they have the heart of the Shepherd who leaves the 99 to search for the one lost sheep. . <i>All are sins, and all sinners who are not repentent will not enter the kingdom of heaven.</i> . Nobody's arguing with you on this point. . <i>I consider you to be one who enjoys arguing (this is obvious by the sheer number of arguments by you in this section alone!) but I have better things to do.</i> . It is not so much that I enjoy arguing, but that I care enough about Christians who are slandered and maligned by other Christians, as is being done to Pastor Stanley right now, that I will try to persuade those holding the guns to put them down. . Go read the policies for North Point. Read about the "Foyer to Kitchen" philosophy, and why they do not hold non-Christians to the standards of Christians. IF, however, you want to become a member, you are subject to the expectations God gives for Christians in the Scriptures, and you will be held accountable for those. . Grace and peace to you. Well, I guess I should have just taken the uncharitable view, then.
.
Unless someone wants to become a Christian, there is no need for us to try and force them to follow the rules only expected of Christians. Heck, we do a poor enough job *within* the church, why should we try to put those outside the church on a “sin-management” plan?
.
My need to know is the same as thousands of others who are asking “what does NorthPoint actually believe?”
.
I other words, unless they are members (or want to become a member), they have no need, whatsoever. Thank you. Should you actually desire an answer, you will listen to the series. If not, you’ll just gripe about it and claim to do the whole sanctimonious “be a Berean” routine. I get it.
.
Homosexuals need to know this also. Are they going to go to NorthPoint and hear that they are living in a lifestyle condoned by the church, or does this church believe the Bible to be God’s Word and what it says about homosexuality is that it is an abomination.
.
You see, you have actually touched on why I hope Andy never answers the question in a public forum. Part of the problem is that the word “homosexual” is conflated to mean both a) someone who is attracted to people of the same sex; and b) someone who is engaged in homosexual practice with other people. “Homosexuality” is the same way.
.
This confusion occurs both with Christians (like yourself) and non-Christians, alike. So, when you say that “homosexuality is an abomination” (or expect that to be taught), what the homosexual (non-practicing and practicing, alike) hears is “you are an abomination to God”.
.
In our culture, one’s sexual preference is ingrained as inseparable from one’s core identity. This is completely unlike any other sin. Someone who is tempted to steal is not a thief, unless they actually are committing theft. Someone who is tempted to commit adultery is not an adulterer unless they commit adultery. But someone who is attracted to people of the same sex are homosexuals, whether or not they act on their temptations.
.
SO – it is quite easy for believers to say things that are terribly insensitive: as you just did, by seeming to declare that homosexuals, practicing or not, are abominations to God. I hope you did not mean it that way, but that is how most unbelieving homosexuals would read what you just wrote. It is also easy to get into arguments about things that have no bearing whatsoever on the situation (like whether or not the proclivity for SSA is or is not genetic).
.
Thus, a wise pastor in today’s society will say little or nothing publicly about homosexuality, but they will be willing to discuss it with those who are actually struggling with it. At least they will do so if they have the heart of the Shepherd who leaves the 99 to search for the one lost sheep.
.
All are sins, and all sinners who are not repentent will not enter the kingdom of heaven.
.
Nobody’s arguing with you on this point.
.
I consider you to be one who enjoys arguing (this is obvious by the sheer number of arguments by you in this section alone!) but I have better things to do.
.
It is not so much that I enjoy arguing, but that I care enough about Christians who are slandered and maligned by other Christians, as is being done to Pastor Stanley right now, that I will try to persuade those holding the guns to put them down.
.
Go read the policies for North Point. Read about the “Foyer to Kitchen” philosophy, and why they do not hold non-Christians to the standards of Christians. IF, however, you want to become a member, you are subject to the expectations God gives for Christians in the Scriptures, and you will be held accountable for those.
.
Grace and peace to you.

]]> Comment on SBC, GCB & the De Facto Name Change Charade by Lydia http://fromlaw2grace.com/2012/05/17/sbc-gcb-the-de-facto-name-change-charade/#comment-18583 Lydia Fri, 18 May 2012 02:38:46 +0000 http://fromlaw2grace.com/?p=3659#comment-18583 "Only with a resounding defeat will those in power realize that the Southern Baptist Convention continues to be a Convention of cooperating conservatives who disdain heavy-handed politics and top-down edicts!" I think the deck is stacked or they would not dare test it. And the convention is getting full of followers instead of independent thinkers. I think it will pass because the "unity" card will be played. Have you noticed that theme a lot lately? As if going along with heavy handed top down edicts and politics is spiritual unity. Boggles the mind the political tactics of the last few years. I would never have believed that Southern Baptists would go along with sealing records of something they were asked to vote on and not balking louder over the unoffical official task force on something they had already voted down. Amazing. This is not the same group of independent minded thinkers I grew up around in the SBC who disdained this top down authoritarian religion and embraced a true Priesthood. “Only with a resounding defeat will those in power realize that the Southern Baptist Convention continues to be a Convention of cooperating conservatives who disdain heavy-handed politics and top-down edicts!”

I think the deck is stacked or they would not dare test it. And the convention is getting full of followers instead of independent thinkers. I think it will pass because the “unity” card will be played. Have you noticed that theme a lot lately? As if going along with heavy handed top down edicts and politics is spiritual unity.

Boggles the mind the political tactics of the last few years. I would never have believed that Southern Baptists would go along with sealing records of something they were asked to vote on and not balking louder over the unoffical official task force on something they had already voted down. Amazing. This is not the same group of independent minded thinkers I grew up around in the SBC who disdained this top down authoritarian religion and embraced a true Priesthood.

]]> Comment on SBC, GCB & the De Facto Name Change Charade by Bob Cleveland http://fromlaw2grace.com/2012/05/17/sbc-gcb-the-de-facto-name-change-charade/#comment-18573 Bob Cleveland Fri, 18 May 2012 01:08:14 +0000 http://fromlaw2grace.com/?p=3659#comment-18573 If this "nickname" is in fact formally proposed, and I can get to the microphone, I will state what I posted on my blog; 1) I queried Yellowpages.com, in 15 Northern cities, from Denver to NYC and 13 other places between. I found 3,038 businesses with "Southern" in their name. I'm afraid we're going to have to find something else to blame for any failure to penetrate the Northern states. 2) If we confess the truth of Jesus' statement that He'd draw all men unto Himself if we'd lift Him up, and if we've been lifting Him up, then we must also believe He drew the 16 or 17 million people down our aisles. Including the 10 or 11 million people who are not in church any more, but we still call "members". Conclusion: we've failed to disciple the vast majority of those He's sent us, and we cannot in truth claim to be "Great Commission Baptists". If we are unwilling as churches and as a denomination, to deal with that fact, it won't make any difference what we call ourselves. If this “nickname” is in fact formally proposed, and I can get to the microphone, I will state what I posted on my blog;

1) I queried Yellowpages.com, in 15 Northern cities, from Denver to NYC and 13 other places between. I found 3,038 businesses with “Southern” in their name. I’m afraid we’re going to have to find something else to blame for any failure to penetrate the Northern states.

2) If we confess the truth of Jesus’ statement that He’d draw all men unto Himself if we’d lift Him up, and if we’ve been lifting Him up, then we must also believe He drew the 16 or 17 million people down our aisles. Including the 10 or 11 million people who are not in church any more, but we still call “members”. Conclusion: we’ve failed to disciple the vast majority of those He’s sent us, and we cannot in truth claim to be “Great Commission Baptists”.

If we are unwilling as churches and as a denomination, to deal with that fact, it won’t make any difference what we call ourselves.

]]> Comment on Andy Stanley, Homosexuality & the Horns of a Dilemma by Howell Scott http://fromlaw2grace.com/2012/05/03/andy-stanley-homosexuality-the-horns-of-a-dilemma/#comment-18570 Howell Scott Fri, 18 May 2012 00:47:55 +0000 http://fromlaw2grace.com/?p=3602#comment-18570 Scott, Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment. You have a cool name, by the way :-) I agree that 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 is a key passage for understanding how God, through the power of the Holy Spirit, have been changed from what they used to be to who they are in Christ. I think that there are large, Evangelical churches in America that see no need (either theologically or practically) for this transforming work in the life of sinners. I do not know that Andy Stanley and NPCC would fall into this category, but there has been a divergence of opinion on just this blog about that conclusion. At this point, I am inclined to not view a confusing illustration as definitive proof that Andy Stanley or NPCC have changed their position on homosexuality. However, I am not going to fault others for not coming to that conclusion. There have been several members/attenders of NPCC who have commented who have been confused by the illustration. Given that these folks would be more familiar with Andy Stanley's ministry, I am certainly not going to dismiss their concerns out of hand. How churches address the issues of truth, grace, sin, forgiveness, etc. will be challenged in the days ahead. I would wholeheartedly agree with your last sentence. Thanks again for stopping by. God bless, Howell Scott,

Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment. You have a cool name, by the way :-) I agree that 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 is a key passage for understanding how God, through the power of the Holy Spirit, have been changed from what they used to be to who they are in Christ. I think that there are large, Evangelical churches in America that see no need (either theologically or practically) for this transforming work in the life of sinners. I do not know that Andy Stanley and NPCC would fall into this category, but there has been a divergence of opinion on just this blog about that conclusion. At this point, I am inclined to not view a confusing illustration as definitive proof that Andy Stanley or NPCC have changed their position on homosexuality.

However, I am not going to fault others for not coming to that conclusion. There have been several members/attenders of NPCC who have commented who have been confused by the illustration. Given that these folks would be more familiar with Andy Stanley’s ministry, I am certainly not going to dismiss their concerns out of hand. How churches address the issues of truth, grace, sin, forgiveness, etc. will be challenged in the days ahead. I would wholeheartedly agree with your last sentence. Thanks again for stopping by. God bless,

Howell

]]> Comment on Andy Stanley’s Perplexing Silence Far From Golden by Karen http://fromlaw2grace.com/2012/05/08/andy-stanleys-perplexing-silence-far-from-golden/#comment-18568 Karen Fri, 18 May 2012 00:46:02 +0000 http://fromlaw2grace.com/?p=3625#comment-18568 Chris L, I read the question. My need to know is the same as thousands of others who are asking "what does NorthPoint actually believe?" Homosexuals need to know this also. Are they going to go to NorthPoint and hear that they are living in a lifestyle condoned by the church, or does this church believe the Bible to be God's Word and what it says about homosexuality is that it is an abomination. Why does the church have to handle homosexuals any different than liars, thieves, adulterers or any other sinners. You will hear from the pulpit that those are sins and that one must repent from them...no different than homosexuality. All are sins, and all sinners who are not repentent will not enter the kingdom of heaven. So Chris, this is my final response to you. I guess you can say you win because you drove every single responder off of this blog. I consider you to be one who enjoys arguing (this is obvious by the sheer number of arguments by you in this section alone!) but I have better things to do. Peace and Blessings to you. Chris L, I read the question. My need to know is the same as thousands of others who are asking “what does NorthPoint actually believe?” Homosexuals need to know this also. Are they going to go to NorthPoint and hear that they are living in a lifestyle condoned by the church, or does this church believe the Bible to be God’s Word and what it says about homosexuality is that it is an abomination. Why does the church have to handle homosexuals any different than liars, thieves, adulterers or any other sinners. You will hear from the pulpit that those are sins and that one must repent from them…no different than homosexuality. All are sins, and all sinners who are not repentent will not enter the kingdom of heaven.
So Chris, this is my final response to you. I guess you can say you win because you drove every single responder off of this blog. I consider you to be one who enjoys arguing (this is obvious by the sheer number of arguments by you in this section alone!) but I have better things to do.
Peace and Blessings to you.

]]> Comment on Andy Stanley, Homosexuality & the Horns of a Dilemma by Scott http://fromlaw2grace.com/2012/05/03/andy-stanley-homosexuality-the-horns-of-a-dilemma/#comment-18558 Scott Thu, 17 May 2012 23:35:37 +0000 http://fromlaw2grace.com/?p=3602#comment-18558 I am a missionary, recently returned to the states for furlough. We work in a remote tribal location and have been pretty much out of the loop of what is going on in America. It has been disheartening to see the progression of deprivation in the American church. The church has welcomed in the wolves under the auspices of "evangelism". Why is it that we are trying to make the world comfortable to come into our "worship" services meant for the praise of God and the edification of believers? I'm 100% for reaching out to the lost, to sinners no matter what their sin, that is Christ's commission to the church and God will add to His church those that are being saved. (Acts 2:47) I am afraid of what the outcome will be from watering God's Word down in order to make our services more comfortable for those who are engaged in intentional sinful behaviors that God's Word very explicitly points out as sin. We as believers have a responsibility to speak out clearly from God's Word a warning to those who don't know Christ. They need to know what God says about sin and what He says about salvation in Jesus Christ. Over the past few days I Corinthians 6:9-11 has been echoing in my mind as I think about this topic. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. Notice that Paul in addressing the Corinthian Christians states, "And such were some of you..." In the past tense. This congregation like any Bible believing congregation was made up of repentant sinners. I don't need to recapitulate what has already been mentioned by others on this blog about how Paul dealt with the man who was living in sexual sin. He wasn't making it comfortable for that man to continue fellowshiping with the assembly of believers and yet Paul's motivation was true love with the desire that the man be saved. Have we underestimated the impact that these sins of our culture have on our families? We can't quietly entertain sin in the church without an ill effect from the compromise. I am a missionary, recently returned to the states for furlough. We work in a remote tribal location and have been pretty much out of the loop of what is going on in America. It has been disheartening to see the progression of deprivation in the American church. The church has welcomed in the wolves under the auspices of “evangelism”. Why is it that we are trying to make the world comfortable to come into our “worship” services meant for the praise of God and the edification of believers? I’m 100% for reaching out to the lost, to sinners no matter what their sin, that is Christ’s commission to the church and God will add to His church those that are being saved. (Acts 2:47)
I am afraid of what the outcome will be from watering God’s Word down in order to make our services more comfortable for those who are engaged in intentional sinful behaviors that God’s Word very explicitly points out as sin. We as believers have a responsibility to speak out clearly from God’s Word a warning to those who don’t know Christ. They need to know what God says about sin and what He says about salvation in Jesus Christ.

Over the past few days I Corinthians 6:9-11 has been echoing in my mind as I think about this topic. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Notice that Paul in addressing the Corinthian Christians states, “And such were some of you…” In the past tense. This congregation like any Bible believing congregation was made up of repentant sinners. I don’t need to recapitulate what has already been mentioned by others on this blog about how Paul dealt with the man who was living in sexual sin. He wasn’t making it comfortable for that man to continue fellowshiping with the assembly of believers and yet Paul’s motivation was true love with the desire that the man be saved.

Have we underestimated the impact that these sins of our culture have on our families? We can’t quietly entertain sin in the church without an ill effect from the compromise.

]]> Comment on Andy Stanley’s Perplexing Silence Far From Golden by Chris L http://fromlaw2grace.com/2012/05/08/andy-stanleys-perplexing-silence-far-from-golden/#comment-18556 Chris L Thu, 17 May 2012 23:05:49 +0000 http://fromlaw2grace.com/?p=3625#comment-18556 Oops! Hit submit accidentally. . But I will not be uncharitable, and I will assume your silence means you didn't read the question. Oops! Hit submit accidentally.
.
But I will not be uncharitable, and I will assume your silence means you didn’t read the question.

]]>