Replies

I debated whether I should respond to your last post, and only just now decided to do so. These arguments can go on indefinitely, and my time is constrained, so very often I just decide to let the other person have the last word, but in this case I thought I’d go at least this one more step. Anyway, sorry for the delay. Now on with it:

I understand the pattern of church practice you are describing. I grew up with it, although my mileage did vary from yours, apparently. A tiny Baptist church, the same small group of people year after year, endless rounds of “Just As I Am” at the end of every service, and we’d all gone forward at least once, and were welcome to come forward again if we wanted, and some of us did, especially as children, because the pressure was enormous.

But none of those public invitation events took root in me. When I was converted down to the heart, I was alone in a hotel room in LA, finally at the end of my excuses, just me and God looking at the train wreck of my life, and then God did marvelous things on my behalf.

But that pattern of using every Sunday morning service as a tent meeting evangelistic service, complete with emotionally powerful musical background, is a fairly recent innovation in the life of the church. And I do accept that God can work through all that noise and still save lost souls. Salvation is His sovereign work and our imperfections will not stop Him from finding and rescuing His sheep.

But the leadership of a church cannot fulfill their duties as shepherds if they fail to oversee the spiritual associations of their flock. I am going to list below a series of passages that show the true church is obligated to be intolerant of those who claim to be believers but openly practice sin in full view of the congregation, with a few observations following:

********************************************************************

2Th 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

2Th 3:14 And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. [15] Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.

1Co 5:9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: [10] Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. [11] But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. [12] For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? [13] But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. [18] For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

1Co 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?

Pro 13:20 He that walketh with wise men shall be wise: but a companion of fools shall be destroyed.

1Co 15:33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

********************************************************************

Now first the objection may be that most of these passages apply to professing Christians engaged in open sin, and you are addressing, presumably, homosexuals who may not claim to be Christian at all, and that’s a fair point.

But I think they still apply in principle, for the following reasons. First, during the hard days of the early church, it was positively dangerous to be found in association with Christians. You could end up paying for your curiosity with your life. So the notion of church as a lecture hall with casual attendees from any and all moral perspectives is really a modern phenomena, a byproduct of the remarkable peace enjoyed by American Christianity. I suspect the house churches in China or the underground churches in Saudi Arabia etc do not have frequent visitors who are not also committed Christians.

Second, the practice of excluding open sinners who are also admitted unbelievers from the private life of the church is based on a principle which is well established and universal in scope. Note the last passage listed above, from 1 Cor 15:33, the modern rendering of which is, quite accurately, bad company corrupts good morals.

It works like this. Let’s say a church welcomes communists to attend any and all services, without restriction, without any effort to manage contact with the flock. I am not speaking from a hypothetical here, but a direct personal experience. This communist proceeds to argue vigorously in every setting, bible studies, prayer meetings, the parking lot, whatever, for a social justice view of Christianity that empowers the government to right all economic wrongs per the communist model.

Now the pastor knows and preaches the truth, including that dusty old commandment about how envy of your neighbor’s stuff is sin, etc., but he’s a go along get along all around nice guy, and the communist is never confronted, though he is actively promoting envy in the church. He has his toe in the door and he is using it to the max to corrupt the flock. I cannot see how God could view this situation in a favorable light. Spiritual leaders will give account one day for how they tended the flock God gave them, not for how many times they got people to come forward at the end of a church service.

Also, please note I am not saying unbelievers who are notorious sinner should be prohibited from occasionally dropping in on public services that are designed as evangelistic outreach. And I do recognize that using Sunday morning as the evangelistic emphasis is a very common model in modern American churches, though I think Biblically evangelism is best conducted by those whom the Holy Spirit has especially gifted for the task.

I am more concerned about those who would intentionally take advantage of the situation and use their easy access as a means of deliberate corruption. Sexual immorality is a particularly powerful device of Satan to lure otherwise good people into great and painful darkness, and a pastor who fails to adequately assess the threat and deal with it head on is not giving the full measure of love to those whom God has placed in his charge.

There’s a lot more I could say, but this is already too long.

Peace,