Southern Baptists break bread with gay community.
Baptists strike new tone on homosexuality.
Some praised the Southern Baptist Convention for softening its tone and message when discussing homosexuals.
[The conference] made waves in the religious and gay communities.
A shift was taking place.
It feels like a new era.
These are all characterizations of a meeting held by the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, led by Russell Moore, along with (a certain number of representatives at least) of the so-called “gay community” as written about in the Wall Street Journal. Most of those characterizations were made by gay activists, including Justin Lee and Matthew Vines.
Here’s a rundown of the highlights:
- Dr. Al Mohler apologized (presumptively, on behalf of Southern Baptists) for “denying the reality of sexual orientation.”
- The crowd was told that “no one goes to hell for being a homosexual.”
- The meetings “established relationships” (between Southern Baptists and homosexuals) that will “carry both sides through a time of dhttps://wordpress.com/post/46224290/neweep cultural change, particularly as the church navigates…the increasing acceptance of same-sex marriage.
- ERLC executives met with ‘gay rights advocates’ in private and agreed to keep the topic of conversation “secret.”
- Apparently under the assumption Christians are scared of homosexuals (I guess the accusation of homophobia fits his supposition), he hopes the “conference will make Christians “motivated to be unafraid to engage with LGBT persons.”
Perhaps most concerning was Russell Moore’s admission that he would not attend the wedding of a homosexual couple, but would attend the wedding reception afterward (and tacit, implied suggestion we do the same) to “…say I love you and I’m here with you. I disagree with you. But I love you.”
Perhaps lost on Russell Moore is that a wedding reception is not only a reception of the married couple of the guests, but a reception of the guests of the new marriage. Perhaps lost on Russell Moore is that a wedding reception is a celebration of the wedding itself. Would Russell Moore eat the cake baked in celebration of the gay wedding? Would he bring a gift to the reception (who would attend without a gift?) for the new couple to enjoy in their new home together? A better question: Why could one not attend the very wedding itself to say “I love you and I’m here with you. I disagree with you. But I love you?” Why only the reception?
The entire affair was absolutely beyond the pale.
There is no doubt that the SBC – being led by Russell Moore at the ERLC – is turning on the issue of homosexuality. It seems that we are content with being firm on the designation of homosexuality as sin, while at the same time treating it entirely as though it’s not.
We’ll give a halfhearted “amen” and gentle nod toward our conservative roots, while forsaking Biblical terminology to use the propagandic language of the gay lobby; whether it’s Al Mohler using the term LGBT (and will no doubt add letters as perversions are piled onto the acronym) or Russell Moore talking about the “gay community.” Communities, of course, are built around values and not sinful deviancy. While not using the term “the spousal abuse community” or “the lying, thieving community,” Russ is all the more pleased to use the lexicon handed him by the agenda-driven gay lobby.
I’ve been warning fellow Southern Baptists about Moore (who by all indications and past history as a Democratic congressional staffer, is a yellow-dog Democrat), who is using his Cooperative Program-funded position to advocate for “Creation Care” environmentalism, amnesty for illegal immigrants (calling Jesus an illegal immigrant, in fact) and embracing the type of culture capitulation that’s evident in this Wall Street Journal article.
In Dissection of a Downgrade (both the RefMT Journal article and a podcast episode by the same name), I explained how Downgrade all-too-often happens. When someone we admire or coalesce with does something sinful or stupid, instead of rebuking them, we defend and embrace the individual, and end up defending and then embracing their sinfulness and stupidity in the process. Most recently, I spoke of the Southwestern trustees’ intentions to change bylaws to allow the enrollment of Muslims in our seminary. To defend Patterson, they have embraced his folly. Likewise, my fear is that the Calvinistic Southern Baptists on the other side of aisle are turning a blind eye to the foolishness of Mohler and Moore because of their theological soundness in other arenas.
[Contributed by JD Hall]