Kevin’s Conversations: Navigating the Culture Wars
Gay marriage and LGBT issues seemingly command our media and culture today. It has been like this for several years now. Conspicuously all the more so when applying these topics to the church.
There appears to be a great desire for many to find out where each and every church and pastor and Christian stands on these issues.
For some progressives, there is the aggressive desire to find out who the loving and tolerant are, and who the haters are. For some conservatives, there is the consuming desire to find out who is standing strong in the orthodox faith, and who are the unholy compromisers. And the church as a whole is engulfed by one big culture war. Sometimes the church is a willful and active participant.
Now gay marriage and LGBT matters are the predominant topic on many days. But there are, of course, other issues that feed into our culture wars. Abortion and religious freedom and guns and immigration and health care, amongst others, are all battled about. Depending upon the topic, one side or the other will often claim the moral high ground, sometimes with both sides simultaneously asserting the greater righteousness.
Now, not all people and organizations are driven by culture wars. While some see great importance in winning political battles on these issues, others eschew any semblance of any such war. Yet, in today’s world, it would seem next to impossible to avoid them completely. Unless one goes completely in a shell and refuses to ever utter an opinion on any hot-topic item, people are going to be drug into a war, willingly or not, simply by expressing a belief on any said issue.
So where does that leave the church? Churches and their pastors and leaders are to preach the Gospel and the Word of God. By doing so, there are going to be times of overlap with culture war issues of the day. Some maybe more directly than others. The church can avoid intentionally focusing on or overemphasizing these issues, but they are going to come up from time to time. If not by the church itself, then by outsiders who request/demand that the church and/or its leaders give answers to their inquiries.
Some issues seem to embroiling more and more within the church itself, with some portions of the church abandoning orthodoxy and traditional church teaching while other portions obsess about speaking to the truth and depravity of certain choice sins while displaying very little love or compassion. Therefore, we can leave outside culture completely out of it and we’ve got some serious issues to deal with in house as a church family. (Although, in some regards, the influences and pressures of our culture have contributed to these things becoming issues within the church in the first place.)
So the church, which we all know is pretty much the exact opposite of a monolith unit, has plenty of moralistic matters it needs to deal with just within itself. As these issues are being dealt with, how does this then translate as to how the church, or Christians as individuals, are to relate to the culture at large? If a church will not affirm same-sex marriage or homosexual behavior, how should it and its members interact with a surrounding culture that more and more says these things are good and should be universally accepted and sanctioned by the state? If a church is against abortion, how should it and its members operate within a culture that allows for abortion? If a church believes the alien and widow and poor are to be cared for, how should it and its members work within their society to try to make this happen?
Certainly the church should be first concerned with being in alignment with God’s teachings and God’s will on these issues. Some issues would seem to be easier to discern based on Scripture and all the years of established church teaching and orthodoxy, while other issues may be more complicated and not quite as clear. Whatever the church discerns on these issues, they should teach and demonstrate to their members as is appropriate. How should the church and its members then interact within society on these things?
Placing one’s head in the sand and just ignoring the culture is not an appropriate reaction. But neither is trying to win a holy war and conquering the culture to be wholly in submission to the church. I may say it is no skin off my back if two women want and do get married to each other. But then at the same time, if the culture starts pushing on my school age daughters that it is okay for them to romantically like other girls and encourages them to experiment and tells them its okay if they want to marry another girl, then I cannot just sit idly by as I believe these things to be wrong. All the more so if schools in their structures and teaching are encouraging these things. I certainly need to instruct my daughters in what is right, but how should I and the church go about protecting my daughters from the teachings and pressures of this conceived corruption? And how should I and the church go about protecting others from these troubles and also influencing the culture to follow God’s ways, as it will only end up being better and healthier for everyone to do so?
We can replace the example in the previous paragraph with plenty of other issues and end up with similar questions. What about a complicated issue like health care? What can and should I and the church do to see that people are cared for, most especially the poor and downtrodden? Beyond what we can and should do individually and locally to help those in need, to what degree should we be trying to influence our culture to see that this action takes place?
The elephant in the room in this discussion is to what degree should we and the church get involved politically to try to see good accomplished and morality to be upheld in our culture? Again, some want to completely eschew politics, but that would seem to be too simplistic. Even the most basic and prioritized task of the church, that of proclaiming the Gospel, will have political implications within the culture. Thus, we have to deal with politics to at least some degree.
I am not one to clamor to be a culture war warrior. In today’s environment, to fight the culture wars seems to so often mean making one’s bed with a political party or affiliation or politician and to be intensely supportive of said person or group and to disregard all their troubling aspects while maintaining a laser focus on demeaning and defeating all others who are “against” you. With as much dirt and corruption as there exists with both major political parties and most politicians and political organizations, I believe it is often wrongful to declare any one party or politician as the “Christian” choice and to disparage those who do not see it that way. Unequivocally hitching our ride to any one politician or political party is not the prudent manner in which to act.
But if we are concerned with the treatment of not only our friends and family and loved ones, but with humanity as a whole, we will need to speak and even sometimes take action within our culture on what we believe to be right and God-honoring. And often that speech and accompanying actions will have political implications. Each and every one of us is in different circumstances of life and so what God would have for each will vary from person to person. God may have plans for some to become more politically active than others.
As for the church, it needs to stand for truth and sometimes that truth will have unavoidable political ramifications. I do not believe the church should set out to be intentionally political or combative or to disproportionately focus on pet issues. And its alertness on showing compassion and aiming to help those struggling in these issues should be just as strong, if not even possibly stronger, as its fastidiousness in speaking the truth. But there are times when the church will need to and should speak to the truth of issues. Issues that sometimes can be hot-button topics in our culture.
I have given some opinions but have also asked some questions. Questions that, at least in my mind, do not have simple or easily ascertained answers. As I am apt to conclude many of my writings, I implore God to give us wisdom and compel us to act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly as we think through and act on these matters.
I think historians will look back on this era as a time when we redefined Christianity around various social and cultural concerns.
I believe it will also show that it was redefined into irrelevance .
As a pastor these issues are in our face not as culture wars but as pastoral and parental concerns. This stuff is huge and cannot be ignored.
as a parent today these issues are thrown in the faces of our children… huge and cannot be ignored indeed… perhaps we in the Church need to show each other more support and respect – affirming the Faith, because…
the children see the backbiting and in-house wars and compromises and they have reason to wonder about what we say we believe
i suspect that so many Jews converted to the Faith when Jesus was here because they knew something was out of kilter in the Temple; they’d watched first hand the hypocrisy and arrogance in the leadership … today our children won’t have the blessing, the luxury of Christ in their midst if we don’t show Him to them in our lives
I think these are very much church issues and some within the church try to minimize them by calling them something else — culture wars. Isn’t that a cute dismissive term to make those who hold to biblical christianity go away.
I was reading today an article about Vogue Teen magazine promoting anal sex to their teenage audience. To me this is not a “culture wars” issue – this is a holiness issue.
Kevin,
First of all, I agree with Michael’s comment at #1.
Secondly, it seems to me that we have moved into a time in which more and more often we will have to “agree to disagree” with a range of people and policies. Eugene Petterson reaffirmed an historical, biblical stance. What if he had not? My reaction might have been disappointment or regret, but if speaking to him, I think we would have to “agree to disagree”. This would be without demonizing him or trashing his life’s work.
In the rising generation, they already have LGBT friends. They already, in many cases, know same-sex couples. It seems to me that part of what needs to be taught is to “agree to disagree”. It is not a compromise, it is not “finding a way out” of taking a stand. Just as with Mormon friends, if it turns to matters of faith, we “agree to disagree”. I believe enough in the integrity of the Gospel that it has its own power if shared in love.
Even with other Christians with priorities that I cannot own, we can “agree to disagree” without breaking the bonds of fellowship. In an increasing polarized Christian community, perhaps our ability to show love, despite very real disagreements, may be our greatest witness.
#4 – maybe there should be some consideration given to that word, “holy”…
you often declare (rightly) that we’re all sinners… i think we get that, but are we bogged down in it?
how do we hold the standard high? it seems to me that we may be overdoing it in the other direction… the don’t want to appear self-righteous, the “holier than thou” thing…
have to get off this computer, but am pondering MLD’s point
So whether or not we call these issues culture wars, they do have some bearing on and within the church. How do we handle them in the church? How do we handle them outside the church?
Duane,
I think the “agree to disagree” approach is a good idea in many situations, especially within the church. However, the difficulty comes when the other party is not satisfied with agreeing to disagree. When they want you to submit to their desires or else they’re going to make life difficult for you (and your loved ones). Then I think we have even bigger challenges.
#8 Kevin
Yes, but isn’t that the heart of Christianity – “not being conformed to the world”. The “promise” of following Christ is taking up a Cross. I think the “issues” are different and more pervasive, but our response must be qualitatively the same as the early Church:
Make an offering of incense to the genius of the emperor – no…
Participate in gladiatorial spectacles – no…
Attend a brothel with friends – no…
I could go down the list, but we’re not the first ones to face this.
Duane,
We’re certainly not the first ones to face this. And many before us have encountered far worse situations. But we can only operate within the time and place God has placed us.
When the schools want to encourage homosexual behavior to our children, or the state wants to remove parental consent for our daughters to get abortions or the government wants to remove the safety nets that some of our loved ones desperately need by no fault of their own, how do we handle these situations?
If these types of wrongful pressures happen within the church, we can always separate from the group that we believe to be wrong and leave them to be and they no longer have any rule or control over us (although this can often be much simpler said than done). However, separating from our culture or state is a much less viable option in many ways. We can say no to homosexuality or to abortion or to neglecting the poor and needy. But how do we react when the culture and/or the state is potentially causing harm in these manners to our loved ones and those we are responsible for?
I’m not espousing definitive answers. I’m more asking the questions for discussion.
“How do we handle them in the church? ”
We are to preach / teach against them. and preach and teach the holy alternatives.
“How do we handle them outside the church?” – is there a place know as “outside of the church”? Is this some safe zone where a Christian does not discuss the holy? Is this some place where the church member must check his brains and or opinions at the door?
Is there a difference “in the church” and “outside the church?”
Kevin,
You’re asking great questions.
Let’s make it slightly more complex.
You asked;
“When the schools want to encourage homosexual behavior to our children, or the state wants to remove parental consent for our daughters to get abortions or the government wants to remove the safety nets that some of our loved ones desperately need by no fault of their own, how do we handle these situations?”
What do we do when the same people who might stand against the moral issues are the same ones who would take away the safety net?
Here’s the question I think we’re actually asking.
How can we stand for what we believe without paying any consequences culturally or losing our own comfort?
The history of the church is that we can’t, but we stand anyway…
MLD,
“Inside the church” is where there is a gathering of believers, at least those who claim to believe.
“Outside the church” is any other place that will still include some believers, but will also include a bunch of non-believers and is not a place/organization/gathering/structure whose purposes are meant to be primarily Christian.
Kevin
As in every age, we hope to instill Christian values in our children, even though those values may have to be increasingly counter-cultural. The early Church faced many of the same issues and societal pressures.
As citizens, we can seek justice and mercy in the laws enacted by the State, without resort to an unholy alliance of Church and State – something that has seldom turned out well. Christianity from the beginning as been counter-cultural. It is in our DNA. We are supposed to be “in the world, but not of the world”. It is always a balancing act.
Are we indeed different from those Christians who had to live out their lives in Roman society or the world of late antiquity? They had to deal with the sexual mores of their time. They had to deal with the issues of abortion and even infanticide. When the poor were not provided for, by the State, the Christians did it themselves; to such an extent that even their pagan neighbors noticed. While we are in a more technically complex society, many of the issues are the same.
Michael,
Yes, the church should stand for what is right, even if it means paying cultural consequences and losing comforts. But how does that standing taking place? Is it anything more beyond saying that those of us in the church won’t participate in actions we believe to be wrong and immoral?
“What do we do when the same people who might stand against the moral issues are the same ones who would take away the safety net?”
I don’t think there are necessarily easy answers to your question, but I will say that I would also include the safety net as a moral issue, not something separate.
Duane,
“As citizens, we can seek justice and mercy in the laws enacted by the State, without resort to an unholy alliance of Church and State – something that has seldom turned out well.”
I very much agree.
The hard part is in determining how best to go about this in our complex society.
“but I will say that I would also include the safety net as a moral issue, not something separate.”
Which puts you outside mainstream Christian politics…
Kevin,
I think what I’m really trying to say is that it is a losing game to try and infuse the culture or the State with Christian virtues and/or values. If we take that as a given, it comes down to what we do as Christians in our individual lives and what we try to do as an expression of our faith communities.
It’s clear from the pages of the NT and the Church Fathers that the Church was made up of people that ranged from slaves up to and including a very few prominent members (“not many wise”). I seldom see such a cross section when I visit churches. I seldom see a wide cross section of income levels, race or occupation these days. We are mainly middle class, or middle class aspirants! If however, we worshipped with someone without food to put on their table for their children, the situation might seem less complex. We’d know what to do.
I think we want big overarching answers to our questions. I’m beginning to think we might do better looking at the immediate situations on our doorstep.
Michael,
“Which puts you outside mainstream Christian politics…”
Yes it does. I think safety nets are a more complicated issue than other examples I have given such as abortion or gay marriage. It’s not as black and white as I do not think the government should be responsible to provide a “safety net” for every possible situation of any possible need by any possible person who wants one. There needs to be some discretion and everybody is going to have a different place where they draw that discretionary line. But, yes, the big picture issue of the government providing safety nets to those in need is just as much a moral issue as the government sanctioning same-sex marriage or allowing for and even funding abortion.
“I think what I’m really trying to say is that it is a losing game to try and infuse the culture or the State with Christian virtues and/or values. If we take that as a given, it comes down to what we do as Christians in our individual lives and what we try to do as an expression of our faith communities.”
There it is…
Duane – but in America today, unlike the time periods you speak of, Christians have both a vote and a voice – and we are to use them to influence others.
#22 MLD
Yes, and we can use that vote and voice to seek justice and mercy in the laws of the State, but by so doing we cannot invest the State or the culture at large with the attributes or aspirations of the Church.
“we cannot invest the State or the culture at large with the attributes or aspirations of the Church.”
Well, since those attributes and aspirations revolve only around the forgiveness of sin (the thesis I hold is the purpose of the church) you are correct.
However, christian people can work like yeast in the society at large, expanding the christian ideal.
Duane,
“I think we want big overarching answers to our questions. I’m beginning to think we might do better looking at the immediate situations on our doorstep.”
Again, I agree. I think our greatest focus should be on those people and situations in our immediate circle and environment. But what I can’t get out of my head is when we see those in our immediate environment being negatively affected, or potentially negatively affected by the culture and/or state, what should we do about it, if anything? And, of course, the bigger picture is that those same negative effects are affecting everyone within the culture/state and so there is still some level of concern for our fellow man in general, even if it’s not our primary focus.
#24 MLD
Indeed, as we have done for millennia… When we speak of the State and the culture, we are speaking of secular society. Definitions matter –
sec·u·lar
adjective
1. denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis.
“However, christian people can work like yeast in the society at large, expanding the christian ideal.”
We (the various sects of the church) do not agree on what the Christian ideal is.
I just saw an article about the deportation of a man who’s been here 16 years with no record and no government assistance.
His children were saying goodbye at the airport.
The Christians commenting could not contain their enthusiasm over this family destruction.
If that’s a Christian value, I prefer hell, thank you.
1. denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis.
Yes, this would be the case if I went to speak at the city council meeting about the sewer issues in the city.
For ideas in the public square – not so much.
#25 Kevin
Yes, as Oscar Romero said, “When I fed the poor they called me a saint. When I asked why they are poor, they called me a communist.”
So, we use voice and vote for laws reflecting justice and mercy… in the meantime, however, we address the needs, spiritual and temporal, of the person on our doorstep.
When Jesus sent Moses to Egypt to free His people and lead them to the promised land, Jesus did not say (1) tell the Egyptians to reform their laws to give my people better rights and living conditions, or (2) get my people better living conditions, but leave them under Egyptian rule. What He did say and do was to free His people from slavery and lead them out of Egypt to a new promised land (flowing with milk and honey).
When Jesus came as the true Israelite, as Israel, God’s Suffering Servant, the Messiah, He didn’t go to Galilee to reform Herodian rule, or to Judea to reform Roman rule, or to the Temple to reform the priestly service or worship. What Jesus did come to do was to ransom sinners to a new kingdom, which He brought to earth as in heaven. He came to free slaves; to put sinners to death and raise new creatures, not, this time, through the Red Sea, but through the waters of baptism.
The vocation of the Church is to continue deliver the gifts of the cross to sinners, to free captives, to transfer them from the domain of darkness and place them in the kingdom of the Son, in whom there is redemption, the forgiveness of sins. This is done by the preaching of Law and Gospel always with the purpose of setting a captive free. The Church is to serve, not be served.
Remember, we are ambassadors of Christ. We are “friends” of the King. The culture, under the dominion of the Satan, hates Christ His Gospel and Kingdom and, by extension, His representatives. Is that news to anyone? But, just as Christ was merciful to His enemies (i.e., us), He wants us to be merciful to our enemies.
I’ve been watching over the last few days as James White has been accused of everything unholy because he had an “interfaith dialog” with a Muslim.
Now, White is a very conservative, very orthodox, Christian.
Not conservative enough for people like Janet Mefford who are almost rabidly attacking him for basically acting like Paul on Mars Hill.
They have so politicized the issue that any sort of variance in the name of God is utterly forbidden.
In light of this climate, what do we do?
I know what I’ve chosen to do.
I haven’t written anything on the issues that are important to me lately because it’s become pointless.
I have abandoned both the “church” at large and the culture as I see them both as agents of destruction.
I have purposed to act according to conscious in my local area of influence.
I’m trying to teach more on prayer and living the Christian life in love and sacrifice in our own church.
We try to teach T those principles as well.
We have, as Xenia writes…gone local.
i have a feeling that the world out there wants us to stand…
right now is an opportune time to practice our Faith outside the doors of the building we worship in…
we ought to be as identifiable (and offensive to some) as the woman in her burka (but not as artificial and pretentious)… trouble is we concentrate on the crude, rude bullies and waste our time trying to figure out how to handle them “in a Christian way.”
i remember my grandfather turning and quietly walking away from a Pentecostal (somewhat celebrity in the movement) pastor who loved to tell dirty jokes… as a child, observing this quiet act, i got the message.
i remember my grandmother frantically looking for someone to drive her to the home of a Japanese family she knew who were headed for internment. she wanted to help them, if possible.
my question is, why can’t we simply walk our talk in the world?
why do we feel that our Faith is defined in church sponsored projects or looking for some poor soul to bestow kindness on from our lofty perch? i think as a whole we are more artificial and contrived than we know…
we’re human and we’ll sin but the goal of being holy isn’t wrong is it? holiness should wrap around us like the invisible wind that describes the Holy Spirit, Himself.
probably my thots are too random to sort out here – i apologize…
just thinking about about holiness, how my grandparents lived, but that was another time, wasn’t it? dunno
Jean,
So using the Moses example, are you saying God’s instruction is that we should put up with whatever comes our way or leave the country? This is what happens when you apply theocratic rules to today’s society.
If I remember correctly, you voted in the last election. Wasn’t that your attempt to overthrow Herodian rule – or maintain Herodian rule?
Em,
I think you make a lot of sense…
a post script to my #32…
Michael and Xenia seem to be working on this out in the world… at the skate park and taking meals to the elderly…
taking meals to the elderly… something my grandmother did on occasion from her own kitchen as she prepared supper for the family… it was a different time then, i guess
MLD,
“This is what happens when you apply theocratic rules to today’s society.”
Then don’t do that. You are confusing individual vocations.
Hello, friends,
I am out of town for a while with a terrible Internet connection. I haven’t disappeared and I have been reading the discussions as best as I can.
All the best to everyone,
Xenia
Xenia,
Thank you for letting us know…I was a tad concerned…
Come on Jean,
You could give Penn & Teller a run for their money with your slight of hand.
Politics is nothing more that a person working individual vocation joining together with many others with a similar individual vocation.
The church is to forgive sin through word and sacrament. No one would suggest legislating people read their bibles, of be baptized etc. However, a christian in their vocation to be salt and light would and could do so by serving in elected or appointed office.
MLD,
Unless you actually read and respond to something I’ve written, this will be my last attempt to dialogue with you. I don’t know what you’re talking about in 39. If you disagree with my #30, identify specifically where you find disagreement. Because I never said a Christian could not serve in elected or appointed office.
You are almost beyond the pale. And what you say next could put you beyond or bring you back into the realm of constructive conversation. It’s you’re call, friend.
LOL, well I’m not going to play the game where you get to judge each of my comments and then you tell me what kind of comment may redeem me.
Good try. 😉
Still praying for you big brother! You have so much going on i don’t know how much more you can handle…praying for strength and mercy
Michael,
To your post about James White – I think you take this incidences too seriously. James White is a cartoon figure who does nothing without looking for a fight or notoriety. The fact that he caused a dust up is nothing new. The fact that someone has pushed back may be a new twist. In the end he is still a bully.
Janet Mefford needs controversy to draw a crowd to her radio show. But it depends who’s ox is being gored. You used to sing her praises when she went after Mark Driscoll.
James White, Janet Mefford and their audiences are very much like the WWE.
I think White has grown up…and I think he’s done a lot of good work on this issue.
Mefford has become radicalized to the point that I don’t recognize her.
I totally disagree with your estimation of both their audiences…
Thank you, Dusty!
“I totally disagree with your estimation of both their audiences…”
What are you thinking, MMA instead of WWE? Which ever they are, neither audience is very sophisticated – more on the level of Rush Limbaugh’s audience..
those two state-robot-things are way out of scale. if it’s blue and red you’d have a blue midget fighting a red giant based on geographical area
look at a map of blue vs. red sometime, overwhelmingly red by county, it’s a few hyper-populated urban areas that ruin the politics for the whole country
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2016/countymaprb1024.png
Whoa…
Where did we go from Kevin’s very thoughtful piece? I’m here because I want to discuss theology and Church history, not engage in name-calling. It was respectful and constructive. It should remain so..
If you want to call people names, do it on Facebook. I respect other people way too much to engage in that sort of childish behavior here…
Duane,
What is interesting about church history is that what happens today is a part of that continuous line of church history.
Yesterday and today have become history – what will be remembered is a different story.
What will be accurate… is yet another story.
Homosexuality is not really an issue in the Scriptures. It seldom is mentioned at all. Of the few mentions existing, some would appear to be in error in the KJV, and others misrepresented.
*Four instances of “Sodomite” appear in the Scriptures, when the actual word seems to mean “devoted / sacred ones” or something along those lines. Their devotion possibly did involve homosexual acts, as well as heterosexual. But the point is it is not to us to second guess what God says.
*Jude refers to Sodom and Gomorrah as “hetero” in their pursuit of “strange flesh”. The point being, it’s not “homo” sexual acts that appear to bring on the judgement of God in any way.
*The sins of Sodom are listed, one through six. Homosexuality is never listed at all. The only possible sexual reference, is “committed abomination” appearing dead last. Over eating (sin two) and too much leisure time (sin three) appear to be more damming. This also must factor in the reality that “abomination” is a frequent word meaning to disgust, or cause revulsion. It usually appears in regard to religious practices of antiquity.
What is never preached to Evangelicals regarding the Law, which does in fact condemn homosexuality, is the purpose of the Law in the first place. The Law is called the Law of Sin and Death, and it’s only purpose is to be impossible to fulfill, and therefore result in death for all humanity. Alongside numerous sexual prohibitions, is death resulting from wearing mixed fabrics, (Yes, cotton/poly blend is fatal) and tithing to your local church. ( The Temple Mount is the required destination, and it can’t be ten percent of your paycheck)
Evangelicals are instructed constantly to follow the Law. But, God’s word says keeping the Law, results in a person being cursed.
NP: Mark 9:42.
TNV:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7%3A1-3&version=ESV
#51-” it’s only purpose is to be impossible to fulfill, and therefore result in death for all humanity”
we should be clear that there’s a little more to it … it is to show us an abridged glimpse of God’s standard (which you are correct in stating that we cannot meet) – it is not, however, a set of arbitrary gotchas
@ New Victor
I’m curious. Very much so. Explain?
We can change our culture, but it starts by saving one lost soul at a time. We are to be salt and light to a dark and corrupt world. And yes, I do believe we should do what we can legislatively to have moral laws and uphold them. We need to infiltrate our culture: Meaning, we need Christians to be lawyers, school teachers, actors, college professors, politicians etc. and make a difference in our sphere of influence instead of abandoning certain occupations because they may be perceived as ungodly or questionable. If each one of us Christians lived in such a way as to represent Christ, we might win more converts. But today we let the “professionals” within the Church worry about evangelism. This was never the way God intended to win our culture to Christ. Each one of us is to care about souls in our daily lives and be that salt and light to them.
Now in regards to our interactions with those lost, we need truth with gentleness and humility. Right now we are seeing fruit from our outreach to the homeless. We have a couple who will be coming to our church this very Sunday. We are excited! Yes, they are addicts. Are we going to jump all over them about it? No. We are going to let the Holy Spirit work in them just like He worked in us when we were first converted. That requires patience and trust in the work of God. We are just going to love on them. They know themselves their drug addiction is not good. The Holy Spirit will sort it out as they sit under the teaching of God’s word. Will we be there for them if they need rehab help? Yes, we will and can provide that help. We also have a homosexual couple who we’ve encouraged to attend our church (they are relatives) We want the LOST to come into our church!! When we unleash God’s Word and love and disciple them, God will sort out their sins like He does ours. We are NO DIFFERENT.We are not afraid to tell them the truth but we need to use wisdom. The more we as a Church break outside our little sterile walls and get our hands dirty, the more we are fulfilling our commission. And it’s wonderful!