Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
I get your point. But there are plenty of practical living issues that--apparently given current thinking--are hard to determine by simply reading the Bible. For example:
Is gay marriage valid?
Is abortion permitted?
Can married couples divorce?
Can we sue other Christians?
There are arguments on both sides of these questions, and Christians line up both ways. So without some kind of direct guidance from God, simply knowing the Scriptures seems inadequate.
Thoughts? |
I have begun listening to some of the podcasts generated by Dallas Theological Seminary. They are not entirely toe-the-line Dispensational, Calvinist, anti-(whatever) pabulum, although you do know where they are coming from.
For example, one of the Professors at DTS was the guest on the podcast discussing women in ministry. She (yes, she) is a member of a Bible church in the area that made headlines for allowing women to preach from their pulpit. (So a seminary that generally holds to no women preaching ahs a woman professor attending a Bible church that allows women to preach.) And the discussion was in no way anti-women preaching.
But in another, the guest was a preacher in a very different tradition who recently wrote a book on the issues of LGBT and the church. His perspective is from having his parents divorce when he was young because his mom was lesbian. He discovered later that his dad was also gay but kept it secret. Despite the distress of his mother when he decided to go to seminary and become a preacher, he took on an assistant pastorate. One day when he was scheduled to preach he invited his mother to come. Much to his surprise, she did. But after the service the church leadership took him aside and requested that he never invite such people to their church again. So he resigned. His views on the subject, while never stated in a black-and-white way, were what you might expect of a "good Christian" with one exception. He believes that salvation is for everyone, and that like so many besetting sins that are struggled with over one's lifetime, having same-sex attractions is among them. And God deals with each of us on these things. That does not mean that churches should not have standards or positions, but that they should reflect love for those in need of Christ and in need of perfecting their walk with Christ.
In other words, while many of us are certain that we have the right answer on these things, at some level it is not my job to purify the assembly, but rather to love everyone, both within and without it.
And while these are items of dispute from reading the same Bible, I have never had any "sense of the Spirit" concerning these kinds of issues. I have had a lot of mental thought on the subjects. And have current positions (mostly like the ones I have always had). But they are not really derived from some sense of the leading of the Spirit. Or even a "sense of life."
The leading of the Spirit with respect to any of these issues seems to lead me more in terms of how I deal with the people who are on either side of the debate. Or on neither side because they aren't Christian and don't think about it. That is where I find leading. I am convicted of my callousness toward the gay guy in the office. Or the unmarried woman (divorced with 2 kids) who is living with her boyfriend. Or the guy who just pulled out of the side street into the only lane with any traffic in it (right in front of me). Or the Pakistani who owns and operates the deli downstairs and has no pork of any kind on the menu (hint, hint. probably Moslem). And so on.
There really isn't much real interpretation issue when it comes to these things. I don't need to stand firm for the "right position on [x]" to have interactions with people with differing opinions on the same issue(s) and therefore have a requirement to treat them as I would have them treat me.
I am not saying that doctrinal positions on both theological and moral positions is not important. But I am not sure that it should be what we spend much of our time studying about, praying about, and even seeking the guidance of the Spirit. Surely I believe that it is important that some do that for the sake of the rest of us. And I do hope that we are astute enough to decide between competing thoughts on each subject. But those should not be the primary reason that we study, pray, and live. And they should not be the main things in which we seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
These may be more worthy than debates about angels and pin heads (pin-heads??) but they are not the things that we were charged concerning in places like the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus did not say to hold to the best position on the sins of others, but to seek righteousness and to apply it to yourself more stringently than even the 10 commandments demanded. So where does the Spirit begin speaking to us when we find ourselves having too many non-work-related conversations with that guy/gal in the office? Where is the line between making legitimate friendships and becoming attracted in an improper way (even if nothing ever comes close to "happening")?
Have a good position on those moral issues. And apply them to ourselves thoroughly. But be merciful with respect to others. Not just those who toe your/my moral stances. I think the Spirit speaks here much more often than on what specific nuance of the range of positions on abortion, LGBT, divorce, or even suing other Christians we should hold. More likely on how we think about followers of Mohammed. How we refer to them. What derogatory monikers we use for them. Same for our attitudes toward all kinds of Christian and non-Christian sinners.
I am not denying enlightenment with respect to the reading of scripture on other issues. But when we are talking about the issues you raise, the clearer answers are found when we block out our knee-jerk reactions and start the inquiry as freshly as possible. There is a lot of mental work to be done on these. But even when we think we have an answer, there is also the consideration on how to apply it. To ourselves. To others.
The kind of "sense of the Spirit" that is mostly mentioned is almost always concerning life and living. It is seldom about doctrinal inquiry. That does not mean there is no sense of the Spirit in those things. But I note that when such things were brought to the church in Jerusalem, a number of people spoke from different angles. And then the took time to consider and pray. And from that, it "seemed good" to the group and to the Holy Spirit (assuming that the attribution is appropriate — and I do) concerning the answer. And that answer still took stances that were not necessarily going to stand forever as stated. Yet it seemed good.
The thing to me here is that when it came to external points of teaching, it was not a matter of one person's "sense of the Spirit" on the matter. It was a combination of what was sensed by many persons. And I suspect that each would have generated a slightly different edict if it had been up to them. Yet when they, as a group, were finished, they could all say that it "seemed good." In today's terminology, I think what they said was "we can live with that."
As for gay marriage, it is a fact legally. In many ways there is a lot about it that the church has nothing to say about. But in terms of what it means spiritually, there is much to say. But it should be more about the church saying it than just me. So there needs to be a group that takes the nuances of the whole issue and comes to a "it seems good to us" position. I can live with that. It is not my decision to make. Not shirking my responsibility. Just stating it in the way I think is appropriate.
And in all of this, I have no problem with your position on any of these issues, or on whether a "sense of the Spirit" on them is important to the individual Christian or should be what is keeping them up at night. I just may think about it differently.