…habitual sin and holy ostracism

Current Tunage: Oh, Sleeper – Son Of The Morning
New record out, sporting an inverted, “horns cut off” broken pentagram on the cover. Heavy material. Apparently it’s a concept album, where all but the last song on the record is voiced by Satan – and the last song (”The Finisher”) is God’s response. Check out an interview here that will explain it a bit better. All in all, it’s a pretty amazing record. The guest spot with Cody Bonnette of As Cities Burn on track 3 is wondrous to behold (or rather, to be heard). Either way, compelling stuff. I’ll share some lyrics soon.

This morning on Facebook, I posted a video of Dr. John Piper responding to the question “How should Christian friends respond to a friend who has entered a homosexual relationship and moved to a church that accepts it?”. During the discussion that followed, I realized there’s something much deeper at stake, namely, “How should Christian friends respond to a friend who claims to know and follow Christ but has made a truce with their sin?”. Ultimately, “Holy Ostracism” isn’t about homosexuality in particular, it’s about any mode of sin that we might make habit and be unrepentant of.

1 Corinthians 5:9-13 ESV
I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people– not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler–not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”

The answer? It depends on the person, and what they claim. In both cases, we love them.

If they don’t claim to be a Christian – to know and follow Jesus – we love them. In this case, loving them means that we (among other things) seek to propose (not impose) the Gospel; that God became Man, lived a perfect life, and was crucified by his enemies (namely, us) to save and deliver and redeem them… and arose again 3 days later to prove all of the above.

If they claim to be a Christian – to know and follow Jesus – we love them. In this case, loving them means that we do many things (worship together, “do life” together, bear each other’s burdens, serve Christ together, etc). It also means that, rather than sharing the Gospel with them, we hold them accountable to their claim OF it.

What does this accountability look like? Well, obviously, it’s rooted in relationship. If someone claims Christ and avoids his body (the Church), that’s a separate problem (equally grievous, but separate). So, assuming they’re in relationship with other believers – in this case, you – what does holding them accountable look like?

Simply, it looks like loving them enough to challenge them, question them, confront them, and rebuke them for their sin. Always gently, always in love, always with Truth (ie. the Word of God), always patiently and helpfully. It also looks like committing what Piper calls “holy ostracism” eventually.

Titus 3:10-11 ESV
As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Holy ostracism is something that, prayerfully, we do when someone refuses to deal with their sin (or acknowledge it as such despite the clear teaching of Scripture). It’s not something that happens overnight, it happens in response to a pattern of stubborn and selfish love for sin – a love for sin that eclipses love for Saviour and His Name & Glory. It looks like a severance of relationship because it is – it sounds like this: “We can’t be friends anymore until you either stop claiming to be a Christian, or repent and begin the process of making war with the sin you prize.”

Quite frankly, I have some friends who – because of the way they live – need to stop claiming they know and follow Jesus. They are hypocrites to the n’th degree and, much more than that, their “peace” and “truce” with their sin declares to the world that the Saviour doesn’t save. For this reason and others, “ostracism” is what scripture prescribes for that kind of circumstance.

Of course, I also have many other friends who claim to know and follow Jesus and their lives show it. Not in perfection, but in constantly moving forward and dealing with their sinfulness.

2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 ESV
If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.

If someone habitually and stubbornly refuses to deal with – for example – their pride (aka self-idolatry), they need to be held accountable and consider how, and IF, that is acceptable for a follower of Jesus. We present them with loving rebuke and correction – as brothers, not enemies – and if they consistently refuse to see the problem or to move forward against it, we break fellowship (and lovingly give them the ultimatum above). The rebuke is always loving, always geared toward restoration and reconciliation with God.

To refuse to help others in this way (I believe) weakens churches, weakens believers, and gives plenty of weight to outsider’s charges of meaningful hypocrisy amongst Christians. There is nothing to be gained by refusing to break fellowship with the unrepentant, and much to be gained from “handing them over to Satan”.

1 Timothy 1:18-20 ESV
This charge I entrust to you, Timothy, my child, in accordance with the prophecies previously made about you, that by them you may wage the good warfare, holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting this, some have made shipwreck of their faith, among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.

Obviously, one must be in a place in this person’s life to know about their habits and their patterns of living – this of course means that to be in a position to do ‘holy ostracism’, you must be in a place from which to ostracize. Of course, this is complicated by the way that things like Facebook and Twitter make friends who, in past ages, would have been more “stranger” and “acquaintance” than “friend” something much more. From the wonders of social networking, people’s lives are on display, and their attitudes and sinfulness with it. We don’t have to look far anymore to see “friends” who are pregnant (or have impregnated) outside of wedlock, or living with someone they’re not married to, or carrying on with a lifestyle of drunkenness and debauchery… all while claiming to be “Christian”. The trick with this is that although we might have the data, we don’t have the relationship and thus, holy ostracism’s goal (restoration to God) is unnattainable in such loose contexts – not to mention we aren’t close enough to them to know if they’re dealing with their sin, repentant and putting themselves under spiritual discipline. It is this which leads me to believe that holy ostracism is something reserved for honest-to-goodness real life contexts where not only will it actually have meaning, but where its purpose can actually be worked out through the division of relationship. This hints at something at the heart – holy ostracism isn’t something done entirely for the sake of the person being ostracized. Why? Simply because holy ostracism isn’t always helpful for the person being ostracized. If it were, we could say that was the reason behind it. Really though, doing ‘holy ostracism’ is about God – it is always helpful for the name of Christ and for the collective integrity of those who claim His Name.

Matthew 18:15-17 ESV
“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

We don’t cut off lightly, but we must do it when someone claims to follow Jesus but lives habitually in a “backslidden” state of habitually not battling the flesh, not battling pride, not battling selfishness, not battling their natural, sinful impulses. Believers are marked by war – against sin, against self, against the flesh, against pride, against lust, against everything that arrays itself against our God and Saviour. Those who claim to believe but live in contradiction need to be confronted with the witness their life gives and called to repentance – and if they refuse to agree with God and turn from their wicked ways – they need to either stop claiming to believe, or they need to be subjected to holy ostracism.

…queer theories

Current Tunage: Smoke – Mudd
Oldominion ftw.

John 8:3-12 ESV
The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.” Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

One of the courses I’m taking currently is entitled “Advanced Critical Theories”. Put simply, it is a kind of… for lack of a better way to explain it… “language and linguistics theory on crack” course.

Anyways, the past few weeks we’ve been going thoroughly over a series of theories (how’s that for a tongue twister?) concerned with gender, sex, sexuality, and such things. For example: Feminist Criticism & Theory, Queer Theory, Gender Criticism… and so on.

It has been interesting material to go through, but ultimately all the discussion has simply served to highlight much of what Mark Driscoll spoke about in his recent sermon on Sexual Sin, which you can watch here:

Religion Saves & Nine Other Misconceptions Week 5: Sexual Sin

I’ve posted/blogged about this topic to some extent before:

Keep Your Head Above The Water

I suppose I haven’t changed my mind much, other than I’ve further clarified and (perhaps) simplified my positions on this issue. Of course, they’re best explained in person, but for now, here’s a rough summary of the key points:

1. Deriving simply from the NT usage of the Greek word πορνεία [Porneia], which is essentially a junk-drawer term for any sexual activity outside heterosexual marriage… Sexual immorality is any sexual activity that isn’t between two people, man and woman, who are married to each other. Love isn’t the standard, covenant monogamy is. Sex is not about a boundary or line, but about a starting point (heterosexual marriage).

2. Christians and the Church need to take serious steps to deal with the heterosexual immorality that seems so pervasive even as they address the issues surrounding homosexuality. We need to be able to bring something to the table like this: “I love you, but what you’re doing is wrong according to God’s word. That being said, I’m just as much a sinner as you in my own heterosexual immorality and yet Christ has worked in my heart to free me from my sin in those areas. Just like you, I was born with a tendency towards sexual sin, and though the object of that sin differs for us, Christ’s goal according to the Bible is identical in each of us: sexual purity and conformity to God’s sexual standard… which is freedom from sexual activity outside of covenant heterosexual monogamy or free enjoyment of sexual activity within it.”

3. So-called “Tradional” gender identities are, for the most part, supported by Scripture – both in terms of their original conception (ie. Genesis – “God made them Male and Female”) and in terms of the application of that principle in the New Testament by Paul and Peter.

4. Sin corrupts everything – not only our natural sex drive (which is meant to direct us to faithful covenant monogamy with one person of the opposite sex), but also our natural gender identity. Our biology and our physiology, sociology, emotionology, and intellology are all inextricably interconnected and though sin seeks to mar the image of God by corrupting and distorting the clear and God-given genders, or by suggesting that our biology (ie. our bodies) and everything else about us (ie. our so-called “gender identity”) are separable… I don’t think such a case can be made from scripture. Point of clarification: Culture dictates what “male” and “female” mean and are, when for the believer it should not – we must turn to scripture to illumine what it means to be man or woman, not to the world. That’s the standard to which I’m holding this against, not the social constructs “male” and “female”, but the Biblical ones – whatever that may be (which is another discussion).

I must say that this morning in class they certainly made some impassioned appeals to my sympathies and the idol of blind tolerance today though. Fact is, men and women were created different in so many myriad and mysterious ways… destabilizing gender will only serve to destabilize everything, and destabilizing sexuality (as our culture has done, and indeed many before it have done) only serves to further the very reasonable argument that man’s default religion is Sex, not Christ. When we’ve got acronyms to throw around like “LGBTQQ” (as I saw in the recent Trent “Queerlines” supplement to the university newspaper the “Arthur”)… what does that say except that a holistic outright rejection of God’s design for human sexuality (ie. covenant heterosexual monogamy) has occurred and occurs daily – and it’s not a new thing, it’s just more visible now than ever before in recent history.

In the midst of all this, I have a great deal of respect and love for my very small handful of friends who identify themselves in those camps. Particularly when they identify themselves as a believer also. It must be hell – to face rejection from Christians for identifying as Queer, and to face rejection from Queers for identifying as Christian. It’s the catch between a rock and a hard place, and I haven’t really figured out how I can help or be an encouragement. I want to help, but I can’t condone. I want to show love but I don’t want it to be misconstrued as endorsement. I want to speak truth and life and at the same time be anything but harsh and unfriendly. I want to say that “Christ delivers me from my sin and He wants to deliver you from yours” but I don’t know how to say it so that it will make sense.

I want to love Christ, and I want to love my Queer neighbours the way Jesus does. I want to love them without casting the first stone (or any) because of my own guilt, and yet still somehow find the strength to say “Go, and sin no more” or “Repent, and live”.

Ezekiel 18:30-32 ESV
“Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, declares the Lord GOD. Repent and turn from all your transgressions, lest iniquity be your ruin. Cast away from you all the transgressions that you have committed, and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! Why will you die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord GOD; so turn, and live.”

I’ll close with this, a thought from a song that summarizes one side of the tension I feel – namely the desire to be a voice that speaks out and says “This is so wrong!”. Understand that feeling is only one side of my tension, but a very strong one.

And now you want to try to separate independence from your bonded state?
-Project 86 “Independence?”

…keep your head above the water

Current Tunage: As Cities Burn – Of Want and Misery: The Nothing that Kills
‘Cause I’ve got to keep your head above the water,
While the current pulls me under.

This post is largely birthed out of a discussion I had with Joey Royal concerning how the church ought to approach homosexuals. Though we disagree on some key issues, it was a fruitful and thought-provoking discourse. Being a student at Trent, which is known for its Queer community, these issues are prevalent to me in my everyday life as I brush shoulders constantly with people from this orientation.

All that being said, let’s examine things a bit. These are hardly safe waters to tread in, given our current cultural climate, so I expect a certain amount of flak. However, I firmly believe that what I have to say here lines up with the Scriptures. I also believe it ultimately forms, at the most basic level, the foundation of how followers of Christ should approach not only homosexuality as a topic/issue, but also how we ought to approach homosexuals. This is only a surface scraping of these issues, not a full fledged examination, and is intended to provoke thought and discussion.

I believe that people are “born” homosexual inasmuch as homosexuality is one of many outflowings of our sinful nature and total depravity. To explain and extend what I mean by this: One might rephrase the common by saying that, due to their sinful nature, they were “born” with a tendency to seek sexual fulfillment outside of the Biblically prescribed (and blessed) covenant heterosexual monogamy.

The problem here is not just homosexuals, they are only one facet of a humanity-wide problem of seeking to satisfy our (in this case sexual) desires in ways that go against the very Word of God, and along with it we go against the biological, physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual design He created us with.

In the case of homosexuality, the deviancy is in gender preference (the Biblical mandate being cross-gender union). For everyone else, the deviancy ranges from the extreme (bestiality, pedophilia, etc.) to the common (masturbation, pornography, adultery, fornication). All forms of deviancy and perversion from the Biblical pattern will not satisfy because they deviate from the very design of human sexuality. All are equally our natural inclination (ie. we’re “born with it”), however all are SIN and therefore wrong.

So, how do we approach homosexuality? Once the church starts dealing objectively about freeing straight men (and women) from the strongholds of sexual deviation in their lives in frank, redemptive, and truth-grounded ways, then we’ll be in a place to deal with homosexuality. Until then I have a feeling that any acceptance of such people will be either welcoming of the sin (ie. ignoring the Biblical basis against it, much as we ‘ignore / aren’t real’ about heterosexual deviancy for the most part) or our acceptance will be half-hearted, aimless, and ultimately draw us collectively further from the Lord.

So, for us this means: Let’s first start by finding our ultimate satisfaction in Christ such that we have no remaining desire to deviate from His will for our God-given human sexuality. Let’s recognize that the God we serve is fully capable (and willing) to destroy the lust, perversion, and deviance in our hearts and minds. Then, having experienced the victory in our own hearts through walking with Him by His power and enabling, we can not only accept homosexuals, but encourage them in the truth: That the Biblical standard is not only attainable and beyond ideal, but also that the deviancy we were born with is fully destroyed by the redemptive work of Christ inside us, and so it can be for them.

Matthew 5:27-28 ESV
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

To sum up, here’s what believers have to synthesize from the Scriptures as they approach this issue:

  1. The Bible condemns homosexuality. So should we. (Romans 1 being the most straight-forward reference – any other interpretation is, frankly, an assault on the authority of Scripture… if you want to toss one piece of the Bible out, do yourself a favor and toss the whole thing.)
  2. The Bible condemns any construct for the expression of human sexuality that is not covenant heterosexual monogamy. So should we. (This is best understood through careful study of 1 Peter 3, Ephesians 5, 1 Corinthians 7 & 11, among others.)
  3. The Bible teaches us to love our neighbors (Matthew 12:31 – all inclusive), and our enemies (Matthew 5:33-34 – all inclusive). That pretty much covers everyone, so we should.

What does this look like? Not what “the church” is doing, and not what most Christians are doing.

It looks like Christ – firm in the Truth (turning tables in the temple?) but characterized by a disposition of Sacrifice (the cross).

We are called to be freed of our own sexual deviance and lust, and from that to sacrificially love homosexuals. In loving them, we are to be honest and vulnerable enough to let them know that God has a much better, more fulfilling, and perfect plan for their sexuality… as he has for, and is working out in, us.

In that context, there should be no difficulty accepting homosexuals into the church just as we accept fornicators, adulterers, pornographers, and so on. No difficulty because the context they’re accepted in will be truth – which is what FIRST our context of acceptance for heterosexual deviance must become: a context of truth, purification, and redemption.

Addendum (13/02/07):
Finally, if you think this post is somehow aimed at homosexuals, it’s not. Such would be a misreading of the above text. I’m calling out heterosexual believers here, to stop and check out the “planks” in their own eyes (their own sexual deviance), and have them purified and removed by the redemptive sanctifying power of Christ within… before they start trying to point out specs in the eyes of others and approach this issue. In doing so, I’m pointing the finger at me as much as anyone else.

The God we serve is fully ready, willing and capable of redeeming our sexuality and everything else that touches the core of our identities, all we need do is stop holding onto our sin and ask Him to touch our inmost being effectually in these things. Until we can claim and proclaim the victory through Christ, by God’s grace, over our own sexual deviance, we have no business telling homosexuals that they too can be freed of theirs – which we need to be able to do. So, trust and obey, heterosexual believer: God is not only fully and completely able, but also more than willing to redeem your sexuality and remove all trace of deviation in your life, all you need to do is ask Him.

Someone show me a hole in this cycle,
Show me the way away, and I’m coming back the way I came.
No! I’ve seen this place before!
Surely this is no place for the light of this world!

Oh, how sweet the sound…
I know it saved, but is it changing a wretch like me?
Oh my God, how sweet is the sound…
I once was blind but now I just look away.

My bride, I don’t want to know what I’d be without
Forgiveness brushing these adulterous lips.
-As Cities Burn “Thus from my Lips, by Yours, my Sin is Purged”