http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Jewish-Bible-OE-David-Stern/dp/1880226480/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255465130&sr=1-1

Thanks for helping us along.

Debbie – I am speaking to both people inside and outside the church. Obviously, inside the church brothers/sisters have more rope to be able to speak into someone’s life. But none the less, my general thought is that until we earn that right, even in the church, speaking into someone’s life who doesn’t know/respect/have a relationship with you (just because you both go to the same church or profess to believe in the same stuff doesn’t mean knowledge/respect/relationships come with any of those commonalities), it will probably just be brushed off—for most people. I think that if someone cares enough to speak into someone else’s life, they should then they should also care enough to intentionally invest a lot of time in that person’s life before any speaking is done.

Shawn – I really appreciate your remembrance that the church is Christ’s bride, and indeed, Christ is just waiting to empower us once again with all the gifts of yesterday, today and forever! Amen to that—and I believe we can reclaim all of it. It just takes that first step, which unfortunately today, is means that step is completely against the grain of acceptability in church settings.

Second, I believe that the Church today mirrors Israel in the Old Testament. We have betrayed our "Husband" for another. We are worshipers of idols (power, greed, judgment, pride, division, etc). We are not different today than how God described Israel in Hosea.

Third, I strongly believe that Christ still deeply loves His Bride – the Church – just as He still deeply loves His people Israel. Though I think that God is allowing the Church to go through this refinement, I do not believe that He has given up on the Church. We are still the Bride of Christ.

Just as the Church applies "love the sinner, hate the sin" to gays and lesbians (and other people they don't agree with), so I think we (Christians) need to apply this same statement to them (the Church). If that makes sense?

My point is this: because Christ loves the Church, Christians are to love the Church. It's our job, as the "stronger brother" (Romans 14), to help lovingly spur on our brothers and sisters in the faith, who are "weaker", in living out the message of Jesus. I believe you are such a person doing this Andrew … as am I.

“Are you at all able to admit there is legitimacy in folks objecting to equating — for a host of reasons, not all of which are religious — gay marriage to traditional marriage? Is that a debate that should be censored, in your opinion? Or can we let each side stand on its merits to see which ought to be accorded the higher status in the eyes of civilization? To say nothing of God.”

Sure, you can legitimately object to my marriage, just like Catholics can object to my cousin’s divorced marriage and subsequent re-marriage.

That doesn’t mean I have to listen to someone as they call me a sinner. I’ve got better things to do with my time than sit and listen to someone preach against me and my own. Hence, me shutting them out.

On the other hand, to bring the idea of sin out in the open as something that is real and it detrimental to one’s life and relationship with God is another matter. It seems to me the “gay community” — however we wish to define it — takes on a corporate identity and takes any such call as a joint personal insult. Am I wrong? Is it because that call is just so loud that it drowns out any other call that speaks to the myriad sins we all deal with? I think the answer is yes, to a great extent. And where that is happening, the shouters (who do not represent the entire Church) have earned the right-back-at-you name-calling they receive. It is disheartening that the rest of the true Church has to then work to overcome that stigma and wrestle our corporate identity back from them.

Jon, as you have worn your union with your gay partner here as a martyr’s badge, let me ask you this: Are you at all able to admit there is legitimacy in folks objecting to equating — for a host of reasons, not all of which are religious — gay marriage to traditional marriage? Is that a debate that should be censored, in your opinion? Or can we let each side stand on its merits to see which ought to be accorded the higher status in the eyes of civilization? To say nothing of God.

Then again, I don’t know why someone is concerned about being called a hater or a homophobe if they’ve just called someone a sinner. Name calling’s name calling. Goose, gander. All that good stuff.

Andrew, you are referring here to folks outside the Church, right? It is more than hermeneutically hair-splitting obvious that both Jesus and Paul were speaking in the aforementioned Scripture references to the Church. “People in extreme opposition” would make me think you mean outsiders, but you also referenced brothers and sisters just before that. I know you would not want folks to be confused on that point. Maybe you are alluding to the outsider status many within the Church have accorded to GLBT believers (?).

And you are right, a blatant argument isn’t going to accomplish much in and of itself. It will likely further alienate.

“Against you” is not in all Bible translations, of course.

“If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over.”

Now, we could go back and forth quoting Scripture to prove each of our points correct because I believe we could prove each of them correct (see Jonathan and Debbie’s recent comment). But that is something that I will not do because it will not get us anywhere but down a path that talks in hermeneutical circles. I am not here to disprove ‘love the sinner, hate the sin’ but rather here to refocus our mindset inward. If there is something to ‘hate’ it should be in ourselves, in our own lives (which is what we can control) before we ‘hate’ anything on the outside (which we can’t control). I am not suggesting that as brothers and sisters we never go and talk to another brother and sister about sin, but we rarely legitimately earn the right to do so because our initial reaction is that we already have that right – which we don’t. I know some people reading that will think, “but we do have that right because Christ empowered us to do so.” Good point. However that still doesn’t give anyone the ok to speak to people in extreme opposition who don’t want to be spoken to. Which is better then, a relationship with differences (as you continue focusing on your own sin and relationship with Christ) or a blatant argument?

I will be doing a whole post on this issue soon since it has been brought up a few times because ultimately, this post is not about loving the sinner, it’s about God tearing away influence from the church!

The problem is its not that simple. When the Church only speaks about poverty and opression etc. (the ‘social gospel’) it is not being the prophetic voice of God in society. When the Church only speaks about theology and relationship with God (the ‘real gospel’) it is not being the prophetic voice of God in society. For neither are really the Gospel. The Gospel is all encompassing where the Church is to proclaim the Risen Christ and his salvation for all who call upon him, and the requirement for social justice and fight against poverty and opression. Its not either/or.

As a Christian in the UK, I confess to sometimes being dismayed by the politicisation of the American Church. One politicial ideology does not have a monopoly on Biblical teaching. Jesus would not have been a Republican (or a Democrat)! Our theology influences our politics. But the Bible teaches so much about opression, justice, care for the sick and needy, welcoming the marginalised, welcoming the stranger. All of this must impact how we present ourselves in the political arena – whichever political ideology we follow.

So I do struggle with anyone attempting to label a discussion on justice as ‘social gospel’. I’m not saying you are doing that pm I am just saying what I heard – I’m probably wrong! I think it can be falling into the old traps that the liberals can do justice, we evangelicals will do Christ. To be the Church we need to do both. And we also need to accept that within the Church there is as wide a political spectrum as outside it – lets bring the Bible to influence our political view not the other way around.