Category Archives: General

Exodus International – a “gay recovery” ministry – shuts down and apologises

One of the arguments against homosexuality by many conservative Christians is that homosexuality is an aberration of what is “normal”. As such, they believe that homosexuality can be “cured”, and there are many churches and ministries that run so-called “ex gay” programmes to help gays go straight. These are hugely controversial, flying in the face of medical science, research and a growing pile of anecdotal evidence.

So, it must be hugely notable then that today the head of one of the most high profile ex-gay ministries is not only shutting Exodus International down, but also issuing a very public and strongly worded apology for all the hurt and damage his ministry has done over the years. You can read Alan Chambers’ full press release here, or an extract below.

There are obviously people who have had interesting journeys as their sexuality has developed and grown. Sexuality is not a binary state – it is a spectrum. And different people find themselves in different places on this spectrum. I am sure people can move along this spectrum too. And people experiment as well. The Bible has quite a lot to say about all of this, instructing people not to experiment sexually and giving lots of case studies of what can go wrong when you don’t. And people shouldn’t go “against their nature” either.

The apology is well worth reading – it’s from someone “on the inside”. This is not how the church should approach homosexuality.

I Am Sorry

by Alan Chambers, Exodus International
19 June 2013

To Members of the LGBTQ Community:

Continue reading Exodus International – a “gay recovery” ministry – shuts down and apologises

Southern Baptists, Gay Scouts and how churches treat homosexuals

A few weeks ago, the Boy Scouts of America voted to allow openly gay scouts to be part of Scout troops across the country. The ban on sexual activity (heterosexual and homosexual) remains, which means that all the Scouts have done is to indicate that they will not take someone’s sexual orientation into account when engaging with them.

Whatever your beliefs about homosexuality, this surely can’t be a bad thing. Christians who are “against” homosexuality have an issue with the sexual act, and not the “orientation”, since these Christians also believe in “original sin” which means we are all born sinners and have a naturally sinful orientation. It’s not an orientation that is the ongoing problem before God (this is what Christ died for), but the fruits thereof: the sinful actions. Even if you are against homosexuality, your issue is with homosexual activity, and not with same sex attraction (the message from conservative Christians to gays is to remain celibate and not act out on their feelings). Otherwise, you’re simply homophobic rather than Biblical (at least, your version of “Biblical”, but I am trying to be charitable and make a point).

So, someone needs to explain to me why the Southern Baptist Convention voted this past week to recommend to their member churches that they cut all ties with the Boy Scouts of America (as Baptists each church will make its own decision). This is a problem for many Scouts troops, as they use church facilities as meeting venues.

But the bigger issue is surely a question for SBC churches about the message they’re sending to people – especially young people. Will all the other groups who use SBC churches be subjected to this mindset? Will the many Alcoholics Anonymous groups who use SBC churches as venues be required to check the sexual orientation of their attendees? And the Weight Watchers groups? And if not, why not? Will children who go to Sunday School or attend holiday clubs at these churches be asked about their sexual orientations? All the Scouts are doing is removing reference to sexual orientation from their charter (except that they continue to ban openly gay leaders, for now), so why target them in this way?

A bigger issue is what message this sends particularly to young people. It tells them that the church is the wrong place to be anything other than an “alpha male”, “totally hetero” guy, or a “traditional woman”. I can’t believe this would be what Jesus would want us to do.

Regardless of where you stand on the issue and politics of gay marriage, or the morality and sinfulness of same sex relationships, the message that a person has to become straight before becoming a part of God’s Kingdom is dangerous, damaging, untrue and contrary to the Gospel.

I really hope that individual SBC churches do not take the advice of their denominational leaders, and instead continue to support the excellent work that the Boy Scouts do in preparing young men and women to contribute to society and be good human beings.

15 Things Jesus Didn’t Say, by Jim Palmer

Here’s a few things you might hear in church this week, but shouldn’t. Mainly because Jesus never said them.

I picked this up from my good friend, John Benn, a pastor in Durban. It was originally written by Jim Palmer, an author and part of the Religion-Free Bible Project.

15 things Jesus Didn’t Say:

“For God was so disgusted with the world and you that he gave his one and only Son.”

“I have come to bring you a new religion.”

“By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have correct theology.”

“If anyone would come after me, let him disparage all other religions and their followers.”

“If you love me, you will regularly attend a church of your choice… within reason.”

“Blessed are the tithers for they shall be called the children of God.”

“Thy kingdom come, thy will be done in Heaven after the earth goes up in flames and destroyed.”

“You have heard it said, ‘Love your neighbor,’ which means the people with whom you attend church and relate to in your Christian sub-culture.”

Continue reading 15 Things Jesus Didn’t Say, by Jim Palmer

The church, sex and yummy mummies

Driven mainly, it seems, by the alpha-male approach to church coming from Mark Driscoll’s accolytes, churches around the world are talking more and more about sex from their pulpit and lecturns. While there is nothing wrong with this per se, there is a dangerous edge to the message these alpha-male types convey. It’s mainly a message to the wife: stay sexy, satisfy your husband, or else…

As the father of three daughters, I am uncomfortable with this version of sexuality being promoted by the church. Just as much as porn, it objectifies a specific version of womanhood – one that is ultimately unhealthy. It’s not good. It’s not healthy. It’s not right.

And then, I discovered a great post on the her.meneutics blog that helped me understand why: Stay Sexy or Else? Well, Please Forgive These Mommy Hips, When the joy of sex gets replaced by the fear of not being sexy enough, by Janelle Aijian. This is definitely worth reading.

The church really is very messed up in the way it deals with sexual issues. Maybe it’s time to replace the alpha-dawgs who run these types of churches. Just saying…

Redeeming the woman at the well

In John 4, we read the story of Jesus’ encounter with a Samaritan woman at midday at a well. This woman is almost always thought of as a prostitute. There is nothing in Scripture that indicates this. Rather, it is a product of a male-dominated culture and reading of the Bible that sees her as a sinner and not a victim.

This woman had had multiple husbands. Is it possible that in a small community/village that the local prostitute would have had multiple husbands? One maybe. Two at a stretch. But not five. Seriously: pause to consider this. Even in our modern permissive society, prostitutes do not get married five times. This is an impossibility in the rural community Jesus encountered.

No, the very much more likely scenario (I’d say 100% only possible scenario) is that she was a widow five times over. For some reason, her five husbands had died. (These could not have been divorces, for the same reason of logic – but also because the religious law prohibited more than two divorces for a woman). Of course no-one would marry her now. Would you?

Jesus amazes this woman by not only showing knowledge of her five husbands, but also her current living arrangements. The man she was staying with was most likely a benevolent uncle or family member who was giving her shelter in some back room, and acting as her protector. In no way does Jesus suggest this arrangement was anything untoward. There is no hint of condemnation and no mention of sin in this passage. Jesus never condemns her for anything. In fact, for us to think of her as anything other than a tragic victim to whom Jesus showed compassion and love illustrates how badly screwed up our view of women, sexuality and culture has become.

This was a woman who had faced tragedy and horror in her life. Now ostracised from her community, she encounters Jesus. He knows her. He loves her anyway. And he gives her the dignity and honour of being the one to announce the coming of the Messiah to her people. What a story.

That should be a lesson to all who think that their views of Scripture and what is going on in the Bible are completely without fault or need of updating or questioning. What else have you misunderstood because of your cultural conditioning?

Protecting the Poor from Religion

Here’s something we should hear more of in church: stop exploiting the poor. I don’t mean that the church should tell other people to stop exploiting the poor; I mean the church itself should stop exploiting poor people.

The social situation in rural Africa is the closest we get today to the situation that existed in first century Palestine, when Jesus was teaching. And Jesus’ message – among other things – was that the religious leaders were exploiting the poor, and needed to stop. In fact, Jesus’ harshest words were reserved for the religious leaders of his day. He called them “white washed tombs” and “blind guides”. I wonder what he might say to many African church leaders who seem to be mimicking the message and methods of those first century religious leaders.

There’s a reason Jesus was so opposed to them. Religion – as Karl Marx most famously pointed out – can be a drug for the poor (“opium for the people”), sedating them and distracting them from their desperate lives. At one level, that could be a good thing. The problem is that this too quickly turns to exploitation. Fundamentalist religion does this by offering eternal security and certainty of a better life (either now or in the future); and then demanding sacrifice today in response. Its best form produces solid citizens who will work hard and contribute to society self-sacrificially. The worst form, though, produces crusaders and unloving – and unlovely – cultish disciples.

A more sinister religion, though, emerges out of a “wealth and health” based religion. It promises cures for diseases and riches on earth. This is the religion peddled in rich countries through the 24-hour Christian broadcasting networks that ask viewers to contribute financially in exchange for holy water, prayer mats, blessed items and other tat. Mostly harmless, but most certainly idolatry. It is almost always for the benefit of the leader.

It’s when this religion meets the poor that things get nasty. This past weekend in Ghana, a stampede for special anointing water blessed by Africa’s most high profile fundamentalist Christian leader, Prophet TB Joshua from (I am sure you guessed) Nigeria, resulted in at least four deaths and thirty serious injuries. TB Joshua has courted controversy many times, including recent incidents in Ghana where his security guards illegally detained journalists covering his “crusades” in Accra. His Facebook page continues to spout testimonies of the power of the anointing water (from an Indian student who passed his school exams to people finding employment and cures for all sorts of diseases) – but no mention of the disaster in Ghana, except that this coming weekend’s crusades have been cancelled.

There is a form of religion that really would be good for the poor. Sadly, much of what is happening in Africa right now is not that form. And the poor need to be protected from it. When people die, hopefully there is an opportunity for truth to shine through.

Jimmy Carter on how the church treats women

Famously a staunch, conservative Christian, US President Jimmy Carter has recently publicly distanced himself from the Southern Baptist Convention over the stance on women in leadership in the church. His statement is very interesting. Read it in full here, or an extract below.

Losing my religion for equality… by Jimmy Carter

25 January 2013

Women and girls have been discriminated against for too long in a twisted interpretation of the word of God.

I HAVE been a practicing Christian all my life and a deacon and Bible teacher for many years. My faith is a source of strength and comfort to me, as religious beliefs are to hundreds of millions of people around the world. So my decision to sever my ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, after six decades, was painful and difficult. It was, however, an unavoidable decision when the convention’s leaders, quoting a few carefully selected Bible verses and claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be “subservient” to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service.

This view that women are somehow inferior to men is not restricted to one religion or belief. Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths. Nor, tragically, does its influence stop at the walls of the church, mosque, synagogue or temple. This discrimination, unjustifiably attributed to a Higher Authority, has provided a reason or excuse for the deprivation of women’s equal rights across the world for centuries.

Continue reading Jimmy Carter on how the church treats women

Why have South African Christians welcomed CJ Mahaney?

Right now a conference called Rezolution is taking place in Johannesburg. The keynote speaker is an American, CJ Mahaney. Just a few weeks ago, Mahaney stepped down from the leadership of his own denomination, Sovereign Grace Ministries on the back of a court case in which he is a named defendant. The case alleges that Mahaney and other SGM leaders knowingly covered up sexual abuse that took place within their churches. (Update on 18 May 2013: the indictment has now been updated and made public: read the court document here. Warning, it will make you sick to your soul).

This comes on the heels of a leave of absence Mahaney took in 2011, in which he admitted to “various expressions of pride, unentreatability, deceit, sinful judgment and hypocrisy” (see Christianity Today’s reporting of the situation back then).

In October last year, three female plaintiffs filed a lawsuit that alleges “a conspiracy spanning more than two decades [in the 1980s and 90s] to conceal sexual abuse committed by church members”. Mahaney and board president John Loftness, along with six other leaders, are named as defendants for allegedly failing to report incidents of abuse to law enforcement, encouraging parents to not report them, and “mislead[ing] law enforcement into believing the parents had ‘forgiven’ those who preyed on their children.”

Reformed Christians are flocking to this conference and extolling the teaching of Mahaney.

I have no doubt that God can use anyone to speak His message, and that all of us are sinners. But I am very concerned that in a country rocked by sexual abuse such as South Africa, the church would invite this man to speak. It sends a horrific message to a watching world. We need to be more sensitive to the world we wish to minister God’s love to. CJ Mahaney should have been removed from Rezolution conference as a speaker. And his public ministry should not be supported by Christian leaders in this country.

A good friend of mine who happens to be a recently cum laude graduated Masters student in psychology who has a passion for social justice and dealing with the effects of child abuse, has written an article on this issue that I think deserves to be read. You can read and download the PDF here. I encourage you to do so.

I am very disappointed that Antioch Bible Church, founded by Tim Cantrall out of a messy split with Honeyridge Baptist Church a few years ago, has chosen to keep CJ Mahaney on the bill of Rezolution. I am disappointed in my many conservative friends who have supported this conference and specifically Mahaney while knowing the fact that he has stepped down from ministry in the USA. By all means support him privately, but do not endorse his public ministry. I am disappointed that the Reformed churches in South Africa do not take the issue of sexual sin amongst one of their leaders seriously. I am disappointed in the message that a watching world has received from this Rezolution conference.

I distance myself from this brand of Christianity.

The logical and theological gymnastics of those who oppose women leaders in church

As the culture wars in conservative evangelical Christianity continue to rumble along, the pronouncements of some its key leaders are getting more and more disconcerting. I am seriously concerned about the rising “alpha male” type approach to church, embodied mainly by Mark Driscoll and his acolytes. In my home town, Johannesburg, a few churches led by young men have gone this route: denying women any role in leadership or public teaching in their churches. The theological leaders of this movement include John Piper, James Dobson and Wayne Grudem (see more at their ‘Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood‘), and to a lesser extent Don Carlson and Tim Keller (see their ‘Gospel Coalition’).

Rachel Held Evans is running a great series on her blog, calling out the strange, illogical and unbiblical pronouncement coming from this corner of evangelicalism. They’re really getting themselves into a tangle over this issue (something that often happens when Scripture is misinterpreted, misrepresented or misunderstood).

I wrote about this a while ago, when I expressed my concerns about a video put out by the Gospel Coalition. They are using views on the role of women as a test for Biblical orthodoxy, and also claiming that it is not correct to attempt to understand the cultural and historical context in which a Biblical book was written (this completely contradicts the approach Carson has taken in his many excellent commentaries of Biblical books – but it seems that the issue of women leaders trumps his previous work as a Biblical scholar. One wonders why?).

But Rachel has found a few ‘exhibits’ of key statements made by those who oppose women leaders in church – not isolated, out-of-context statements, but key pronouncements and position statements – that just make no sense at all. Take some time to read the links below. You’ll be amazed, and stunned. And you’ll realise fairly quickly that the approach of those who want to keep women ‘barefoot, pregnant and in the home’ (my words, but typically the intention of those who take the so-called ‘complementarian’ view) is more a harking back to some idyllic (but completely inaccurate) picture of 1950s suburban America, rather than anything you can find in the Bible.

Continue reading The logical and theological gymnastics of those who oppose women leaders in church

God versus the weather

Here’s something you conservative Christians should be teaching at church: stop watching the Weather Channel.

The Bible makes it abundantly clear that God is in control of the weather. God causes rain and drought (see Deut. 11:14-17; 1 Kings 8:35-36; Job 5:10; 37:6; Jer. 14:22; Amos 4:7 and Zech. 14:17 – there are many more examples). God controls the “storehouses” of rain, snow and even the lightning (see Deut. 28:12, 24; Ps. 42:7, 135:7; and Jer. 10:13). It is God who sends storms (see Jonah 1:4), sometimes to punish people (Job 37:13). And, of course, Jesus stopped a storm dead in its tracks (see Mark 4:37-41; also see Ps. 107:29).

So, why are conservative Christians comfortable watching the weather channel, which so clearly uses science to show weather systems and patterns and make predictions based on a Godless scientific view? And why are they comfortable with their children learning about the water cycle in school? This scientific vision of the world’s weather patterns presents a picture of a world in which there is no need for God or God’s agency – the weather just works because it is a complete, integrated system on its own.

Now, obviously, I am being deliberately facetious in asking these questions in this way. Most thinking Christians can quite easily accept that the weather works all on its own, without any miraculous intervention from the Creator (To be fair in my reporting, I must say that some don’t and claim that God does indeed control every weather event – see here for Donald de Young’s book, “Weather and the Bible”). And while they certainly believe that God is capable of intervening in any part of this world, thinking Christians don’t see God’s hand in every storm or lightning bolt or hurricane (or quiet sunset or peaceful afternoon breeze, for that matter). The weather just gets on with it, all on its own.

And we therefore understand the verses I quoted above as being clearly figurative, rather than literal (except, possibly, Jesus’ miracle).

So, why then, are some conservative Christians so uptight about evolution? And why can’t they apply the same logic and hermeneutical approach to the Biblical accounts of Creation as they do to God and the weather?

Yes, this blog post is really about evolution and not about the weather. But it struck me today to be a good analogy. Why aren’t more Creationist Christians uptight about the weather, how it’s presented on TV or taught to their children at school? I’m just interested, that’s all…