Hillsong: We haven't shifted at all.

First Things ^ | 10/20/2014 | Andrew Walker

[Gamecock]

In light of new comments from Hillsong’s head pastor, Brian Houston, I wanted to add some additional thoughts to the critical comments I made on Friday.

On Saturday, the Christian Post reported the following statement from Brian Houston:

I encourage people not to assume a media headline accurately represents what I said at a recent press conference.

Nowhere in my answer did I diminish biblical truth or suggest that I or Hillsong Church supported gay marriage. I challenge people to read what I actually said, rather than what was reported that I said. My personal view on the subject of homosexuality would line up with most traditionally held Christian views. I believe the writings of Paul are clear on this subject.

I was asked a question on how the church can stay relevant in the context of gay marriage being legal in the two states of the USA where we have campuses. My answer was simply an admission of reality—no more and no less. I explained that this struggle for relevance was vexing as we did not want to become ostracized by a world that needs Christ.

I made the point that public statements condemning people will place a barrier between the church and the world (and I note that Jesus came to save and not to condemn), which is why at Hillsong, we don’t want to reduce the real issues in peoples lives to a sound bite.

This & like many other issues, is a conversation the church needs to have and we are all on a journey as we grapple with the question of merging biblical truth with a changing world.

What should we make of these new developments?

First, whenever and wherever a pastor sides with biblical teaching and reaffirms his commitment to Scriptural authority, we should rejoice. Brian Houston has done so in this statement, and for that we should be thankful.

Second, Houston phrased his clarification on the basis that Paul is in fact clear about homosexuality, which is commendable. Unlike some, Houston is clearly not afraid to hold Paul’s teachings on this issue as the inspired revelation of God. He has not attempted to distort Scripture to make it appear affirming of homosexuality as others have (Acts 20:30). I don’t want to be too finicky, but it is important to add that Christian teaching on marriage and sexuality isn’t a unique formulation just to Paul; it’s the narrative—full sweep—from Genesis to Revelation. Marriage, gender, and sexuality aren’t just appendages tacked onto Scripture, but are icons of the Gospel and human flourishing (Matthew: 19:4–6; Ephesians 5:22–33; Hebrews 13:4).

Third, I think this is a teaching moment for Christian leaders. The refusal to speak clearly when asked remains a problem, which is what precipitated this to begin with. Given that this issue may be the hottest cultural topic and given the swiftness with which society and, increasingly, the courts have accepted gay marriage, prominent Christian leaders will no longer be able to sidestep this question. We’ll need to be ready with an answer that reflects both truth and grace (1 Peter 3:15). We can’t get away with a hedging position or a triangulating non-answer. What’s more, given how so many Christians are grappling with this issue, it’s of pastoral importance for leaders to not send an uncertain signal. Having the right position but giving incomplete answers is pastoral malpractice (2 Timothy 4:1–2; Titus 2:15; Acts 20:27).

I also think we have to be careful about making distinctions between personal and public positions. This is a distinction the Bible doesn’t recognize. The full, biblical Gospel (one that speaks both a sentence of death, and a hope of reconciliation) is a public truth (Acts 4:12). We hate our neighbor when we hide truth under a bushel (Matthew 5:15). Speaking in uncertain, reticent tones gives the deadly impression that it is pastoral to not speak with biblical conviction. This is wrong. If preaching “salvation” excludes sexual ethics, John the Baptist’s corpse would have a head attached to it, and 1 Corinthians would probably never have been written.

Fourth, contrition isn’t a substitute for clarity. When asked, Christians offer the truth in gentleness and respect, but without apology on behalf of Jesus (1 Peter 3:14–17). We don’t stammer where the Bible speaks. The matter is even more pressing when we refrain from speaking clearly about an issue where our culture is so grievously deceived, such as homosexuality (Romans 1:18–32).

Fifth, while I agree that every follower of Christ is on a spiritual journey, we should expect those we place in spiritual leadership to be certain about the things about which the Scriptures are certain. Missional sensitivity is appropriate, of course. But is it wrong to expect the pastor of one of the world’s most influential churches to have a sound theology of sexuality and marriage—and to offer it when asked? I don’t think so.

I’m glad to see that perhaps Hillsong isn’t “shifting” as many originally thought. I’m glad Houston clarified his remarks. But that he had to even issue a statement is evidence of the very ambiguity that existed in the first place. The clarification is good news though. Not just for those who hold to a biblical standard for marriage and sexuality, but also for our gay and lesbian neighbors we are called to love.

The lesson for all of us in this is quite simple: When asked about a contentious social issue that’s loaded with potential to anger, divide, and invite persecution, “Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from evil” (Matthew 5:37).

[Gamecock]

Mr. Houston, I beg to differ. The only entity to whom the church must be relevant is the kingdom of Almighty God, established in Heaven and earth by the Lord Jesus Christ, and administered through His Holy Spirit through the Community of he saints.

Well said.

[ravenwolf]

I made the point that public statements condemning people will place a barrier between the church and the world

---

John 15:18
If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.

19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.....

I believe it is a Pastors job to tell it like it is but to keep their own views out of it, do not add and do not take away, many will add their own views which will keep people from even seeking the truth which does become a barrier.

Just preach the words Jesus spoke and then if the world hates you remember that Jesus said that it would be so.

Pastors also should be very cautious when preaching from the words of Paul and remember that Paul `s letters were to established Churches who`s members were already part of the church and should have known better than to do some of the things they were doing or condoning, such as 1 Corinthians 5:1

I am not sure which disturbs me the most, those who say that sola scripture is wrong or those who claim to believe in sola scripture but prove they don`t by going away from it in both directions.

[Gamecock]

I made the point that public statements condemning people will place a barrier between the church and the world

As does the proper preaching of the word.

[rusty schucklefurd]

re: “We are too quick and to public to ‘accuse our brethren’. Jesus was quick to call out hypocrites, and we often justify ourselves when doing the ‘same thing’. Gotta remember, Jesus died for those sins. I think we identify these mega-church guys as the enemy, and instead of being ‘numbered with them’ in their ‘transgressions’, we like to separate ourselves from them - more as the hypocrites would do than the one who laid his life down...”

I hear what you are saying, but here again, what Pastor Hillsong originally said was in public, just as your response/rebuke to several freepers here was in public.

Be careful in using the “hypocrite” label because we do not know the hearts or motives of all who expressed their opinion regarding Pastor Hillsong’s remarks. We are not all members of this particular pastor’s church. We are not all members of each others churches here on Free Republic, so it’s kind of difficult to not say anything at all with statements made in a public forum, which is what Pastor Hillsong did.

I’m not accusing Pastor Hillsong of anything, I’m just saying that his remarks were in public, to the general public, so I don’t see the scriptural command to rebuke him in private applies unless you personally are a member of his particular church.

I also do not see pastors of mega-churches as “the enemy”. God bless them because they have an opportunity to reach people that other churches may not (and visa versa).

So, I guess I must disagree with you, respectfully, on this particular issue. I think ministers who give public statements can be called to account, also in public. In fact, I think that may be required in order to show the lost world that truth must be defended. However, the manner in which the truth is defended should be done with love, with respect, and with humility. Not with name calling, disrespect, or animosity.

[LearnsFromMistakes]

I don’t think we are ever to start any correction in public. A former pastor of mine has received more than 1 ‘open letters’ written by well-intentioned fellow pastors. If they came to him beforehand to ‘raise their concerns’ in private, he never told me about that.

Peter denied Jesus publicly and loudly. Made no doubts about it. Jesus gave him a glance, then restored him later - no correction needed - in a more private setting than where the offense was committed.

I didn’t mean to respond/rebuke to any 1 freeper, I thought I responded to the initial post. I am trying to learn how to handle these things, and you probably wouldn’t have to go far back in my posting history to see where I haven’t handled things well. I am trying to re-learn some of this stuff, so it is fresh in my mind. A pastor named Larry Jackson from North Carolina (I think) wrote a book called ‘Numbered With the Transgressors’. It was a great read, and I need to hit it again...some of it echoes within me, but not near enough of it.

[HarleyD]

I explained that this struggle for relevance was vexing as we did not want to become ostracized by a world that needs Christ.

I'm sure if we phrase the message just right thousands will come to Christ just like the day of Pentacost. And we must be careful for we certainly don't want OUR message to be ostracized by the world. /sacm

What ever happened to the idea that Christians will face persecution?

[rusty schucklefurd]

LearnsFromMistakes,

You are obviously trying to follow our Lord with all your heart, and I certainly do not want to discourage you in that and I totally respect you for it.

But, I think you may be taking a truth further than is meant in the Scriptures. Yes, in normal circumstances, we are to reprimand a brother in private first. However, under certain situations, I do not believe the Bible teaches that we never correct a brother in public. The Apostle Paul confronted Peter publicly in Galatians 2:11-17 when Peter was afraid of offending Jewish Christians by associating with Gentile Believers. Why did Paul do that? Because Peter, being such a tremendous leader in the early church, would influence so many new Christians with a wrong idea. Paul felt he had no choice but to correct him right there in front of everyone in order to stop a serious error in its tracks.

I believe this relates to Pastor Hillsong because this homosexual issue is causing many Christians to be afraid to take a stand. When leaders of the Christian community make public statements that might be in error, that needs to be called on - even publicly if necessary - why? Because the whole community, Christian and non-Christian needs to hear the truth. Not a character assassination, but a sincere question as to what he meant by his public remarks.

[StoneWall Brigade]

Very True