Posted on 03/09/2015 8:28:31 AM PDT by Gamecock
On a recent Oprah Winfrey show, Kristen and Rob Bell make a lavish use of “values language,” in an attempt to justify same sex marriage. Kristen stated: “Marriage, gay and straight, is a gift to the world because the world needs more not less love, fidelity, commitment, devotion and sacrifice.” Who does not want to see more love in the world, but do the terms like “love,” “commitment” and sacrifice” need a lot more definition? Do the millions watching Oprah deserve a better defense of biblical sexuality? Indeed, the “made-for-TV” superficiality of these arguments is staggering and is part of the trend in certain evangelical circles mentioned in my previous comment Evangelicalism in Crisis? to accept the homosexual agenda as perfectly in line with the true meaning of Christianity.
In the same interview, Rob Bell provides an equally misleading defense of same sex marriage. Irresponsibly picking and choosing between Bible texts that agree with him, and those that do not, he dismisses Paul’s teaching as mere letters from 2000 years ago that no longer apply, and then chooses a 3500 years old text with which he agrees, namely Genesis 2:18, which states: “Then the LORD God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.’” In a sentimentalizing interpretation of this foundational text, Bell launches into an emotive appeal for companionship, perfectly suited to his Oprah-taught audience. “One of the oldest aches in the bones of humanity is loneliness…Loneliness is not good for the world. Whoever you are, gay or straight, it is totally normal, natural and healthy to want someone to go through life with. It’s central to our humanity. We want someone to go on the journey with.” Bell argues that the Bible, like all warm-blooded human beings, is in principle opposed to psychological loneliness, and thus implicitly endorses all forms of “marriage,” heterosexual, homosexual or poly-sexual.
One clear implication from Bell’s interpretation is that there is no place in inspired Scripture for singleness or celibacy, and that Jesus himself doubtless would have done better, speaking of “love,” “commitment” and sacrifice” with a companion to do the work he came to do. Moreover, Jesus was surely wrong in what he taught about the value of singleness (Matthew 19:11-12).
But let’s look more carefully at the Genesis text Bell cites. In his superficial approach, this is just a pretext, not an inspired text, granted what he now believes about Scripture. In Genesis 2:18, Eve is identified specifically as a “perfectly-fitted helper” (Hebrew, ezer) for Adam. In other places in the Old Testament, this term is used for God as “helper,” not for mere emotional support against loneliness but for the life and death defense of Israel from her enemies (Deuteronomy 33:26-29). For this reason Israel raised to the Lord, their deliverer, a monument, an eben-ezer “a stone of help” (1 Samuel 7:12).
But back to Genesis. This same term, ezer, is used in the Genesis text with regards to Eve two verses later: “The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper (ezer) fit for him” (Gen 2:20). When compared to the animals, and what they could offer, Eve’s “help” takes on a very specific function for which animals were useless.
The help intended was not to lift Adam’s endless sense of loneliness, like a puppy dog, though companionship is a wonderful secondary aspect of marriage, but to take up the massive task of the creation mandate, formally given to Adam in Genesis 1:28: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” The future of humanity, for which the Bells show little concern, depended not on the elimination of solitude by any kind of companionship but on the heterosexual ability to make babies, according to the cosmic formula, egg + sperm = civilization.
Former Megachurch Pastor Rob Bell: A Church That Doesn't Support Gay Marriage Is 'Irrelevant'
Rob Bell Trashes the Bible and Marriage on Oprah
Generally speaking The YBPDLN Ping List is published infrequently, however based on the exploits of the megachurch pastors posts can spike for a season.
Management will not ping members to every thread addressing megachurch pastors, but will tag articles of interest with the KEYWORD: YBPDLN.
If you would like on or off of this list please FReepmail me.
*YBPDLN=Your Best Purpose Driven Life Now
I’m of the view there is a special place in hell for those who pervert scripture and thus lead others astray; and for those who add or remove words or meaning from God’s written Word. God specifically tells us in the Bible to not do that.
This is a smoke screen. Sex is not necessary for "love, fidelity, commitment, devotion and sacrifice." All of these are possible in a non-sexual relationship or environment. They use these to rationalize gay sex (or sex out of wedlock in a normal relationship). Marriage is not necessary for any of these things either but their real objective is to normalize gay sex not promote marriage.
In our church we say "Sola Scriptura" - "Scripture Alone" as the basis of authority. Thus when the Leviticus 18:22 says "Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin" (Abomination) we believe it. And it is settled matter in the Presbyterian Church in America PCA. It's in our Book of Church order that Marriage is between one woman and one man quoting these and other verses. The Scriptures are Authoritative for us and the basis for what we do or do not do.
All folks are welcomed into our churches, but if you want to become a member you must put off practicing open sin, repent and come and follow the Lord Jesus Christ as the Lord of one's life. Membership means actively conforming ones image to His character rather than one's own or the worlds.
Our Society has abandoned and denied the authority of Scripture in this area and the inevitable will follow save for a severe national repentance before the Almighty. I pray this happens quickly before this lampstand be removed.
“Do the millions watching Oprah deserve a better defense of biblical sexuality?” Such might reach one or two of the millions of already brain dead Oprah droogs, but it would be pearls before swine, basically.
The idea that there is no close companionship in life, unless it involves genital gratification, is nonsense.
Sure, homos are paragons of fidelity, commitment, devotion and sacrifice. /s
Just think of the "dreadful loneliness" with out God.
And this is what Bell chose. Now his mind wonders in darkness. Anything he says or does will be in defense of Satan.
Led in large part by organized religion.
But what about the dreadful loneliness without God -- being cast into hell forever? Christ is the word -- can people look at it this way?
Your right and for example, the Presbyterian "... Auburn Affirmation came out, a document signed by 1274 of the denomination’s leaders. Appearing at the height of the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy, the affirmation denied the Bible’s inerrancy. It declared that five fundamental doctrines, previously declared by the General Assembly to be “necessary and essential” were now non-essentials. They were “theories” that should not be used as tests of ordination. Those five doctrines included—the inerrancy of the Bible (in the originals), the virgin birth of Christ, substitutionary atonement, bodily resurrection, and the historical reality of Christ’s miracles. The Auburn Affirmation was affirmed by the General Assembly in 1926. Many believe it was a decisive moment in the mainline denomination that accelerated a decline in membership and a lethal slide away from orthodox Christianity. "
it’s even worse without God (duck’n & runn’n)
Truly a fate worse than death. I think your idea of snow flakes is RIGHT on too, unfortunately.
It’s sad to watch isn’t it? Any time a “church” strays from what Christ and the apostles taught they stray into error.
That wasn’t my idea. That came from a Saint in Heaven about one of her visions while she was on earth.
Has God really said.
Out parents couldn’t even follow one command and Satan’s minions continue to play word games today.
I know, but I think it is pretty accurate. It is too bad, but accurate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.