A Chat With A Revoice Teacher

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ryan&Amber2013

Ryan&Amber2013

Puritan Board Graduate
I was talking tonight with a previous really good friend, and found out he's a teacher with Revoice. He has dealt with homosexuality as long as I knew him. His big thing is that because the homosexual community is so identified in that way of life, he doesn't want to make those converts feel as if they must instantly conform to everything in the church. He has a heart to reach that community. For example, he just befriended a group of homosexuals, and they are a part of a bowling league, so he joined them to build relationships. He's not viewing them as a project, he's just hanging out with them and he'll talk about his views when opportunities come up. Ultimately his goal is to evangelize but he wants them to know he is a friend, and that Christians don't always fit the predispositions that homosexuals typically have of them. I'm trying to process this train of thought and look at the pros and cons. Thoughts?

Blessings all. Keep serving the King!
 
Ryan&Amber2013 said:
I was talking tonight with a previous really good friend, and found out he's a teacher with Revoice. He has dealt with homosexuality as long as I knew him. His big thing is that because the homosexual community is so identified in that way of life, he doesn't want to make those converts feel as if they must instantly conform to everything in the church. He has a heart to reach that community. For example, he just befriended a group of homosexuals, and they are a part of a bowling league, so he joined them to build relationships. He's not viewing them as a project, he's just hanging out with them and he'll talk about his views when opportunities come up. Ultimately his goal is to evangelize but he wants them to know he is a friend, and that Christians don't always fit the predispositions that homosexuals typically have of them. I'm trying to process this train of thought and look at the pros and cons. Thoughts?

Blessings all. Keep serving the King!
Click to expand...
I don’t know your buddy’s theology and history. What I would struggle with is having a bunch of gay men get together. That’s a can of gasoline next to a campfire.
 
Ryan&Amber2013 said:
His big thing is that because the homosexual community is so identified in that way of life, he doesn't want to make those converts feel as if they must instantly conform to everything in the church.
Click to expand...

Does he feel the same way about fornicators and adulterers? Is he at least consistent and intellectually honest in his views?

Ryan&Amber2013 said:
He has dealt with homosexuality as long as I knew him.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that he is homosexual, as well? If so, the bowling activity is likely to end badly. If, on the other hand, he is straight as an arrow, trying to build bridges is not, in itself, a bad thing. Avoiding the truths of the gospel is, however.
 
I am posting this link primarily for you and your own thinking.

Report of the Committee to Investigate THE TEACHINGS OF THE REVOICE CONFERENCE1 Adopted by Westminster Presbytery March 9, 2019

https://s3.amazonaws.com/1ar/2019/06/WestminsterPresbyteryReportOnRevoiceconference-03-09-19.pdf

If your friend is a teacher with Revoice he is in deception.

Whether or not he wants your imput and would read this is really between you and him. But at least read it for your own clarity.
 
I suggest you not judge your friend solely by his connection to that particular movement. It is a young movement, still refining its beliefs and strategies, and not all leaders/speakers appear to be on the same page. So if you want to know what to think of your friend, you will have to do more than evaluate the larger movement. You will have to learn what he thinks personally.

My experience with (heterosexual) unbelievers who have embraced a sinful sexual lifestyle suggests that, indeed, it is common for them to feel as if the church simply hates them for how they live. I suspect this perception must only be greater among homosexual people. It is a barrier to hearing the gospel, so some gestures of friendship are helpful in many cases.

It seems to me that the heart of the current issue is what is said about sin and repentance, and how Christ overcomes sin, when the gospel is presented. Christ does not merely call people to forsake a certain list of sins. For example, he does not merely call a sexual sinner to celibacy. Rather, Christ calls all who would believe to come to himself and to the full salvation he offers, knowing that he will upset our current lifestyle and loves in untold ways we cannot yet see. As difficult as it may be for some of us to forsake the outward activities of sexual sin, the repentance Christ both demands and offers is a still fuller and deeper internal renewal (not necessarily a full "cure" in this life, but far more than just a behavioral change). I suspect the question for your friend is this: does he believe Christ is that able and that glorious, and is he ready to preach that gospel?
 
Revoice is pulling people into its vortex who had previously only been on the edge of the queer community. It is evil and I would not trust anyone officially involved.

That said, new-found faith doesn't instantly solve life's problems. I was talking to a straight fella recently who appears to have come to faith out of an incredibly complex situation. He works many hours by himself and listens to reformed preaching as he adds tiny twigs to what appears to be flames of genuine faith. I shared some of my approach to studying the scriptures and look forward to continuing our discussion in a group setting.

Do we throw such a person under the bus because he can't make giant strides in righteousness because every choice would be accompanied by someone being greviously wronged? Or do we disciple him, trust God to resolve the situation, and look with hope to the day when he can make an unencumbered, public profession of faith?
 
Susan777 said:
Must one earn the right to speak about the gospel?
Click to expand...

In most situations, yes. Unless the person is standing on a corner street-preaching, you do need to earn the right to speak to someone about the gospel - meaning, talk and interact with the person long enough to show them that you value him or her as a person, not just as some anonymous person to be preached at. Evangelism works best when there is some sort of human connection between the two persons: co-worker to co-worker, friend to friend, student to student, relative to relative. In most cases, you can't just walk up to someone you've never seen before and start sharing the gospel cold. They'll probably just walk away, thinking you're annoying or rude.

Establishing that human connection makes all the difference. You need to earn the right to speak.
 
I had never heard of Revoice until I read this post. I did a little research and read some of their critics’ evaluation of them first. Then I decided I needed to give Revoice a chance to make their case, and read their answers to their critics’ questions which were soft questions and not as hard of questions that I would ask. Still, in my opinion, they did badly even with these soft questions.

I believe they are heading in the wrong direction. I believe we should be kind and loving to all sinners, but the Gospel that needs to be forefront is the Gospel that identifies sin and the need for repentance and gives the solution to sin death and hell judgment, Jesus Christ. Revoice isn’t calling sin sin so I’m not sure why they prohibit full-on homosexuality unless it’s to attain the frog-boiling effect. In any case, if you want to go directly to a site where they “answer the critics” and read for yourself their explanations here is the link. https://www.christianitytoday.com/c...founder-answers-lgbt-conferences-critics.html
 
bookslover said:
In most situations, yes. Unless the person is standing on a corner street-preaching, you do need to earn the right to speak to someone about the gospel - meaning, talk and interact with the person long enough to show them that you value him or her as a person, not just as some anonymous person to be preached at. Evangelism works best when there is some sort of human connection between the two persons: co-worker to co-worker, friend to friend, student to student, relative to relative. In most cases, you can't just walk up to someone you've never seen before and start sharing the gospel cold. They'll probably just walk away, thinking you're annoying or rude.

Establishing that human connection makes all the difference. You need to earn the right to speak.
Click to expand...
Richard I agree with you that connection and relationship are necessary to evangelism. No disagreement there. But I balk at the idea that we must somehow earn the right to share the Good News. True evangelism is a love for people in their situations, one sinner telling another where to find eternal life. It requires no preparatory phase of doing good works in order to gain a hearing. I think this is an idea originating in the Christian West, perhaps due to an uneasiness about our affluence. But neither the gospels nor the book of Acts speaks to this idea. I think we are probably agreeing for the most part but “earning the right to speak” is not part of the equation.
 
I think that both Jean and Sarah have pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one. There are some people who think that true Christians could not struggle with homosexual lust. That view is an error in excess, as believers may struggle with sinful temptations to all sorts of things. There are other people who think that homosexual lust (usually disguised under a euphemism like "same-sex attraction") is not in itself sinful. This view is an error in defect, as sodomite desires can be nothing other than sinful desires, as sodomy is contrary to nature. To desire what is contrary to nature can be nothing other than sinful, as you are wanting something contrary to God's moral order. We should seek to help those who are struggling in this area, but part of helping them involves pointing out that such desires are immoral and, by divine grace, need to be put to death.
 
ZackF said:
I don’t know your buddy’s theology and history. What I would struggle with is having a bunch of gay men get together. That’s a can of gasoline next to a campfire.
Click to expand...

Would you similarly struggle with having a bunch of single men and women get together?
 
Ben Chomp said:
Would you similarly struggle with having a bunch of single men and women get together?
Click to expand...
Possibly. When it comes to heterosexuals, I tend to look more at the individuals. I think when a man is repenting from a history opposite sex sin that may be wise for a season.
 
I think we've already lost a lot of ground when we accept the concepts of "heterosexual" and "homosexual". These are not biblical concepts. The Bible does not have a concept for sexual orientation.

Better biblical concepts are these: man, woman, married, unmarried, widow, divorce.
 
Suppose an unbeliever were unusually prideful. In evangelizing the individual, would you explain the sinfulness of pride, get the individual to renounce it, and then explain the gospel and the way of salvation? Christianity is not cleaning up our act enough that we can come to God for forgiveness. However, broad evangelicalism tends to treat homosexuality that way.

I fully recognize that repentance is a necessary part of salvation. But, who on this board can claim to have recognized, repented of, and turned from every form of sin upon conversion? The root sin that needs to be addressed is the sin of rejecting and suppressing the knowledge of God - believing that we can live acceptable lives apart from God. Repentance from this sin - beginning to live a life seeking a deeper knowledge of God and seeking to live a life in conformity to God's Lordship - seems to me to be the a key first step in becoming a Christian.

What does it mean to live a life in conformity to God's Lordship? I doubt anyone here can fully answer that question, and only Jesus Christ has ever actually done it. Hopefully, it means turning from our more scandalous sins and endeavouring to find, root out, and kill remaining sin, and finally dying before getting even close to completion.

I do not at all mean to imply that homosexual sin is not a particularly serious sin that a Christian must fight. But, placing that fight against the sin prior to conversion is sending an prospective believer into combat unarmed. Christianity is not primarily a suppression of sinful desires but an embrace of a savior infinitely greater than anything this life has to offer. Jesus offers far more than any sin can. To the extent we can see Jesus as He truly is, we have a means to resist a sin that separates us from Him.

Here is another related thought. Consider the viewpoint of someone deep in the homosexual community. They have heard many conflicting things. Conservative Christians tell them the way they believe the are (homosexual) is intrinsically sinful. (It is, just as all of us were deeply sinful in a number of ways before coming to Christ) But, many liberal Christian voices (who generally treat them better) tell them that only a few cultural-specific verses in the Bible talk about homosexuality, and they can't apply to us because God is all love and rainbows. Anyone on this board is theologically astute enough to discern the teaching of scripture on this issue correctly, but very few young believers would be able to discern which way of reading the bible is right.

Yes, some in the homosexual community genuinely recognize their lifestyle as sinful. God may use this knowledge of sin to lead them to the forgiveness He freely offers. They may well immediately renounce and leave the lifestyle they are in. Others may initially be confused as to which Christian voices to listen to. They will require time to learn to read the scriptures correctly and see that a major area of their life is not in conformity to God's law. This understanding won't always come quickly since many who claim to be Christians today teach that it is acceptable using complicated and complex arguments. I am concerned that many conservative churches would not give them the time to reach that understanding before sending them down the street to a love and rainbows "church."

Let me go back to the prideful person I started with that we are witnessing to. It is possible that convincing him that his pride is a great sin may drive him to seek God's forgiveness. Or, he may not recognize pride as a sin at all. To the extent he compares himself with other human beings, and remains blissfully ignorant of the God of the Bible, he may blindly not see his pride as a problem. Fruitful evangelism can still take place if he can see sin in his life and his need for forgiveness from a just God. As a Christian, that individual will see his insignificance compared to God, and his complete dependence on God. Pride is incompatible with a Biblical understanding of God and man and especially of the gospel.

I took the time to write this because I see a tendency to treat homosexual sin differently than we treat more socially acceptable sins among believers (i.e., the sorts of sins we are susceptible to ourselves.) Without lessening the seriousness of this form of sin, I do pray that we are better able to reach sinners in this particular community.
 
Ben Chomp said:
I think we've already lost a lot of ground when we accept the concepts of "heterosexual" and "homosexual". These are not biblical concepts. The Bible does not have a concept for sexual orientation.

Better biblical concepts are these: man, woman, married, unmarried, widow, divorce.
Click to expand...

In the Bible, I'm pretty sure, homosexuals are acknowledged to exist.
 
Tom Hart said:
In the Bible, I'm pretty sure, homosexuals are acknowledged to exist.
Click to expand...

No. What we would consider to be homosexual behavior is certainly acknowledged in Scripture and described as sinful. But the concept of sexual orientation is a 20th century concept that is foreign to Scripture. The Bible does not view people as straight, gay, or bisexual. It views them as men, women, married, and unmarried. The idea that we should be identified by our sexual preferences is not biblical and not helpful.

To say that the men of Sodom were gay in our modern understanding of the term is an anachronism and mischaracterization of their sin.
 
Ben Chomp said:
No. What we would consider to be homosexual behavior is certainly acknowledged in Scripture and described as sinful. But the concept of sexual orientation is a 20th century concept that is foreign to Scripture. The Bible does not view people as straight, gay, or bisexual. It views them as men, women, married, and unmarried. The idea that we should be identified by our sexual preferences is not biblical and not helpful.

To say that the men of Sodom were gay in our modern understanding of the term is an anachronism and mischaracterization of their sin.
Click to expand...

You're right that we don't have to accept certain modern notions, but there's no reason to think those notions are necessarily embedded in the terms. After all, what terms are we going to use?
 
Tom Hart said:
You're right that we don't have to accept certain modern notions, but there's no reason to think those notions are necessarily embedded in the terms. After all, what terms are we going to use?
Click to expand...

I like the Bible's terms. I don't identify as a straight man. I identify as a married man.
 
Ben Chomp said:
No that would be a contradiction in terms. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. There is no such thing as "gay marriage".
Click to expand...
I think I understand what you mean but I’m still confused. So-called gay marriage is only real to the people who support it. And it’s quite real to the culture. But what word do we use to refer to a man who is “married” to another man? Is he a sodomite? Or simply a single man? My sister is “married” to a woman. She “identifies as” a married woman. It’s all so tricky.
 
Susan777 said:
I think I understand what you mean but I’m still confused. So-called gay marriage is only real to the people who support it. And it’s quite real to the culture. But what word do we use to refer to a man who is “married” to another man? Is he a sodomite? Or simply a single man? My sister is “married” to a woman. She “identifies as” a married woman. It’s all so tricky.
Click to expand...

It is indeed tricky. And it depends on whether you're wearing the pastor hat, the prophet hat, or trying to do both.

From a completely prophetic standpoint, someone involved in a gay marriage is really an unmarried person living in a sinful relationship. Their vows are not binding because they are sinful vows. The "marriage" can be dissolved because it was never a true marriage. In the eyes of God, people in a gay marriage don't need to get divorced. They cannot divorce since they are not married. Rather, they need to repent and cut off that relationship.

From a pastoral standpoint we want to help people see the beauty of Christ and be drawn to him from whatever mire they are stuck in. I would not tell someone in a "gay marriage" that they need to separate from their partner before I've told them about Christ and what he's done for sinners. Once they are drawn to Christ and ask "what must I do to be saved?" then we can talk about their "gay marriage" situation.
 
Ben Chomp said:
I like the Bible's terms. I don't identify as a straight man. I identify as a married man.
Click to expand...

That does not answer the question. If you're fearful of certain cultural notions attached to words (and that is, I think, avoidable) then you had better figure out what word you're going to use to describe what, for quite some time now, has been called "homosexuality".
 
Tom Hart said:
That does not answer the question. If you're fearful of certain cultural notions attached to words (and that is, I think, avoidable) then you had better figure out what word you're going to use to describe what, for quite some time now, has been called "homosexuality".
Click to expand...

You misunderstand me. I'm fine with the term "homosexuality" used to describe certain behaviors and desires. I am not okay with "homosexual" and "heterosexual" used to describe someone's identity.
 
Ben Chomp said:
You misunderstand me. I'm fine with the term "homosexuality" used to describe certain behaviors and desires. I am not okay with "homosexual" and "heterosexual" used to describe someone's identity.
Click to expand...
The Bible does use the term sodomite. Are you ok with that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Santos
  • Locked
Revoice Strikes Again?
Replies
22
Views
3K
NaphtaliPress
NaphtaliPress
Santos
  • Locked
Revoice strikes again.....again?
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
davejonescue
  • Locked
Learning Latin (or any Language) with Chat - Thoughts?
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
MW
M
cupotea
  • Locked
General Chat Thread
2
Replies
31
Views
9K
LawrenceU
LawrenceU
CalvinandHodges
  • Locked
A Handful with Quietness
Replies
0
Views
1K
CalvinandHodges
CalvinandHodges
Back
Top