Comments

Matt Chandler’s Sermon Asking for Forgiveness While Stressing the Need for Church Discipline — 621 Comments

  1. Tim wrote:

    So whatever she is supposed to learn in order to grow as a Christian woman, it has to come through her husband.

    I’m up the creek then. I’ve never married.

    Thanks, Acts29 for taking women such as me into consideration!

  2. @ Tim:
    Yes sir, I’m atheist. I’m nothing special, we’ve got our loudmouth troll types like everybody else and I’m sure I’ve had my own days like that, but thank you for the kind words. Always happy to be able to discuss this sort of stuff, I’m a philosophy type geek so I love the conversations we can have here.

  3. @ Daisy:
    What gets me is that this sort of oversight is flying in the face of modern demographics, with a lot more people being single, be it just delaying marriage, lifestyle choice or single parent families seem to be where a lot of Americans are heading to in larger numbers. It seems like an oversight that’s going to eventually lead to a stress point for certain church models.

  4. Tim wrote:

    Acts 29 churches believe the man is to “pastor” his family. So whatever she is supposed to learn in order to grow as a Christian woman, it has to come through her husband.

    And a woman is not supposed to speak for herself, either, even when her husband is in total agreement. Learned that the hard way.

  5. lydia wrote:

    @ Arce:
    IOW: He is Sovereign over His own Sovereignty. :o)
    I think focusing on His attributes gives us a better picture of sovereignty.

    Eleven years ago this fall, I was at a birthday party for my best friend in this town, having a conversation with his philosophy-student son and with Roger Olson. During that conversation, I made the remark that Calvinists make God into something like Midas. That is, that God is trapped by his own sovereignty and is sovereign over everything EXCEPT his own sovereignty, so that whatever his power and authority are, happens, willy-nilly. And that is a terrible misunderstanding of both sovereignty and the scripture, as well as making God into an unloving monster. Olson has since written in that vein.

    Yes God is SOVEREIGN. But he has other characteristics as well, including love beyond comprehension, justice, etc. And he wields his sovereign power with love and justice. To say otherwise is to make God into the script writer and us into helpless robots carrying out the script he has mandated.

  6. @ Albuquerque Blue:

    I agree.

    Adult singles now make up over 50% of the U.S. population, according to a study that came out either last year or earlier this year, but many evangelical churches stubbornly chase after married couples, and not just married couples, but married couples who have small or teen children still living at home.

    It’s taken the older married couples (whose kids have left the nest) to catch on to this phenomenon, and some of them are starting to write articles and blogs about how the church is alienating anyone who is not married with kids at home.

    The church is refusing to minister to anyone who is not married with kids at home.

    I think they might get more attenders, which might mean more money for them, if they started tailoring sermons and ministries to never-married people over 30, the divorced, widowers, etc., but they keep ignoring these groups.

  7. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    What gets me is that this sort of oversight is flying in the face of modern demographics

    That’s because theologians behind Complementarianism formulated it in reaction to what they perceived as female encroachment into what were previously exclusively male domains. Grudem, Piper, Knight, Rushdoony, and Gothard were successful in planting the seeds back in the 1970’s and 1980’s that are flowering today. It was based in fear and the prescription was authority hierarchy.

    It will be interesting to see this play out, though I won’t see it. What will happen when people wake up surrounded by divorces which seemingly came out of nowhere at mid-life. Or daughters of Complementarians who become pregnant or daughters who marry Complementarian men and are abused by those entitled men. What then? The system is oversold as the cure for modern relationships, but good people will behave well even when there is no law to make them behave well. Bad people will not be constrained by a system of rules and roles and will exploit such a system for their own good.

  8. @ Gram3:

    And Romans can be read like a legal treatise, where the author sets up the other side’s argument in straw man fashion, and shows its weakness, then sets up another argument and shows its weakness, then finally gets to his own argument and shows its strengths. He also writes ironically, which is my analysis of the whole argument about head coverings (if circumcision is nothing, then why is a covered head important?????, unless he is making an argument about the misplaced emphases in the congregation to which he is writing).

  9. Gram3 wrote:

    . Or daughters of Complementarians who become pregnant or daughters who marry Complementarian men and are abused by those entitled men. What then?

    They get confused and don’t know how to react.

    Like the guy in this:

    “Bible believing” pastors and the enabling of domestic violence
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/johnshore/2015/04/bible-believing-pastors-and-the-enabling-of-domestic-violence/

    Some of the gender complementarians have a huge blind spot.

    They cannot see or connect the dots with how their teachings on gender roles sets women up to be abused later in life.

  10. Arce wrote:

    He also writes ironically, which is my analysis of the whole argument about head coverings (if circumcision is nothing, then why is a covered head important?????, unless he is making an argument about the misplaced emphases in the congregation to which he is writing).

    I agree about Paul using rhetorical devices to make his points. In 1 Corinthians 11 I think he was making the point that women should not bring disgrace on themselves, their husbands or Christ by behaving indecently. He makes an appeal to “nature” or the way things are, which I take to be a social reference to propriety and not an absolute mandate or prohibition on either covering or not covering, long hair or short hair for either sex. The point is for believers not to behave indecently or dishonorably. It was a shame/honor culture which does not resonate with Western readers. I asked one of my Muslim friends what the meaning of headcovering is, and that is how she explained it. I can guarantee you she is not aware of the intramural debates on headcovering. But she understands the shame/honor culture.

  11. Daisy wrote:

    Tim wrote:

    So whatever she is supposed to learn in order to grow as a Christian woman, it has to come through her husband.

    I’m up the creek then. I’ve never married.

    Thanks, Acts29 for taking women such as me into consideration!

    Right, and since Paul said it’s actually better NOT to marry, a whole lot more would be up the creek in an Acts 29 church if they did as Paul said.

  12. Daisy wrote:

    @ Albuquerque Blue:

    I agree.

    Adult singles now make up over 50% of the U.S. population, according to a study that came out either last year or earlier this year, but many evangelical churches stubbornly chase after married couples, and not just married couples, but married couples who have small or teen children still living at home.

    It’s taken the older married couples (whose kids have left the nest) to catch on to this phenomenon, and some of them are starting to write articles and blogs about how the church is alienating anyone who is not married with kids at home.

    The church is refusing to minister to anyone who is not married with kids at home.

    I think they might get more attenders, which might mean more money for them, if they started tailoring sermons and ministries to never-married people over 30, the divorced, widowers, etc., but they keep ignoring these groups.

    Ironically, it is the young marrieds with small kids or teens who have less disposable income and are going to contribute less financially to the church. A never-married over 30 is much more likely to have money and also more time to volunteer for the church.

    I would also point out, though, that demographics are going to differ geographically. Here in rural Texas and elsewhere in the Deep South, unwed teen pregnancies abound and many who avoid that land mine still marry at a young age. It’s rare to find never-marrieds over 30 in this area. Much more common in the Northeast, Northwest, etc

  13. Bridget wrote:

    Remorse and repentance are two different things.

    A very true statement, what amazes me is that Jack separated the two. Could this be the beginning? Jack, your comment “whether there will be repentance and real change can be debated” represents a significant journey from the 110% you cited a few days ago.

  14. Daisy wrote:

    The church is refusing to minister to anyone who is not married with kids at home.

    I have seen so much of this. It’s like, if you’re not having a baby every time you turn around, you’re not on the “in” team, & you might as well go eat worms…..

  15. Tim wrote:

    Ironically, it is the young marrieds with small kids or teens who have less disposable income and are going to contribute less financially to the church. A never-married over 30 is much more likely to have money and also more time to volunteer for the church.

    Tim, I have been out of the game for a long time and things might have changed due to this horrible economy but in the mega world it was the exact opposite of what you say above.

    Thirty something marrieds with kids were more dependable givers and volunteers than singles. It is the kids. People want community and tend to cater to their kids when it comes this demographic. Kids are a real hook.

    In fact, it was common for parents to follow kids to church. Kid is invited one some event by a friend (and there are tons for that reason), parents are more apt to say yes to kid attending church event and next thing you know, kid wants to go back. And it is harder to leave when the kids like it there. And the kid hook is another tactic of sheep stealing. Church as a spiritual disneyland for kids is hard to combat for the smaller churches

  16. Tim wrote:

    A never-married over 30 is much more likely to have money and also more time to volunteer for the church.

    One thing I wanted to add is that out of the churches that do not ignore single adults, they view single adults as free cheap labor.

    Which is not fair or right, either.

    Singles are expected to clean the church, bake pies for free, give free baby sitting services to the married couples, etc., but the preacher and married couples don’t help the singles.

    Singles who are in churches who view them as slave labor eventually get fed up with this, and also fed up with their needs not being met, and they stop going to church.

    It really depends on the church. Many churches disregard singles, but the ones who do notice they exist tend to exploit them as free / cheap labor.

    Singles are not allowed to head leadership positions, not even Sun. school teaching positions. Churches always stick a married person into those positions.

  17. Making sure you are aware of this: http://crazyrunnergirl.com/2015/06/05/my-experience-with-the-village-church-as-a-divorcee/

    Now, there are reasons this could be different from Karen’s case (for one, they don’t know the abuser); however, what stands out to me is she is thankful for Karen’s work and sees what Karen did as making TVC a safer place for people like here.

    It’ll have to be more than one story to show a repentant TVC, but I’ll admit stories like this give me hope.

  18. Daisy wrote:

    Singles are expected to clean the church, bake pies for free, give free baby sitting services to the married couples, etc., but the preacher and married couples don’t help the singles.

    The married couples are too busy filling quivers and Focusing on their Families.

  19. Lydia wrote:

    Thirty something marrieds with kids were more dependable givers and volunteers than singles. It is the kids. People want community and tend to cater to their kids when it comes this demographic. Kids are a real hook.

    Advertisers have known this since TV became widespread in the Fifties. Convert the kid to your product and the parents will fall into line because (in the words of the time) “Kids don’t have an Off switch.”

  20. Arce wrote:

    I made the remark that Calvinists make God into something like Midas. That is, that God is trapped by his own sovereignty and is sovereign over everything EXCEPT his own sovereignty, so that whatever his power and authority are, happens, willy-nilly. And that is a terrible misunderstanding of both sovereignty and the scripture, as well as making God into an unloving monster.

    As well as going into something called “Socratic Atheism” — where God is not God, God’s SOVERIGNITY is and God is just another puppet of that SOVERIGNITY/Predestination.

  21. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    Atheists are still in many ways their early years of forming a movement so we don’t have many schisms or different dogmas yet.

    Just wait. You will.

    I’ll be interested to see how we mirror those of other types of people sharing ideologies as atheists/agnostics/nones grow and start getting traditions of our own.

    Remember that South Park episode?
    Played for laughs, but touched on (and driven by) the same premise.