Posted on 09/16/2014 10:32:38 AM PDT by MNDude
Anytime. :)
What is funny is that so many people who say this have their own opinion of who God is and how we should worship Him and think anyone who doesn't follow suit is looking for ear-tickling and no-consequences sin.
OK, then.Make change for $13.43 from $20.03 in your head, quickly. Name 10 state capitals. Recite the Pledge. What is water made of? What does our First Amendment say? What's the difference between AM and FM radio? When did we land on the moon?
No, you're more indoctrinated, not educated.
I hear what you are saying and I have also said the same. To the extent you may be correct, I may not be incorrect. I offer this to you on the subject of worship. Go in Peace.
http://thecatholicworshipblog.com/the-seven-words-of-worship/
So a millennial finally speaks in representation of all other ones why they are leaving the church, and we are left…with a long article of incoherent drivel?
So the points of leaving are:
1. We’re more educated than previous generations, but the church doesn’t continue to feed our minds. For those of us who grew up in church, it’s very rare for us to learn anything new on a Sunday…. We get bored, real bored.
A recent survey shows that young people know less about the Bible any any earlier generations. Less than 1 in 20 young people can name all 10 commandments. Over 60% don’t know the Story of the Prodigal son. If you are “bored”, guess who’s fault it is?
“2. We came of age in a recession, but the church hasn’t changed its teachings about money.”
She’s right about the prosperity gospel, but jeez, there are thousands of churches out there that teach different things!
the primary times when church programming is scheduled – which makes it very difficult for us to participate in the full life of the grown-up church. We’re not skipping church because we’re lazy or un-committed; we’re skipping it because we have no other choice.
Actually, the millennial generation is working fewer hours than any previous generation. What an attitude of UTTER helplessness.
“3. We’re still processing bad experiences with the church, and that’s going to take time.
We are the children of the Moral Majority and the religious right. The religious homeschooling movement. The Reagan era.”
The Reagan era? The oldest of this generation would have been about 7 when he left office, and his era somehow scarred them? Seems she just tipped her hat as just liberal democrat.
4. “We have good ideas – we’ve been developing them since we were in youth group – but no one seems to care. The church leadership is still dominated by those of our parents’ and grandparents’ generations”
So this is somehow unique to this generation?
5. ” Everyone assumes we’re leaving the church because we want to sin, but that’s simply not the case.
We leave our Christian bubbles and begin to befriend people who don’t believe the same way we do. We realize they’re pretty cool people and not the Satan-worshipping drug-pushing evolution-believing sex fiends we’ve been told inhabit the entire non-bubble world. ”
Again another helpless excuse. There are countless of churches with rainbow flags hanging outside that LOVE having such members.
This article is so typical of the “my behavior is not ideal, but it all 100% someone else’s fault attitude”
“OK, then.Make change for $13.43 from $20.03 in your head, quickly. Name 10 state capitals. Recite the Pledge. What is water made of? What does our First Amendment say? What’s the difference between AM and FM radio? When did we land on the moon?
No, you’re more indoctrinated, not educated. “
Comment of the day!!!
Hold on, here.
I’m not 100% sure if this is what you’re saying, or not... but there would be a fundamental error in seeing a criticism of the “LGBQ[etc.]” labels, and immediately assuming that the critic is violating kindness, or charity, or any other Biblical requirement for the virtuous man. The common “canonical” usage of the LGB[...] term is one of granting that these are “alternate versions of normal”... which is about as antithetical to Christian morality as you can get. When the author of the article decried the ostracization of, quote, “LGBTQ persons”, and when a FReeper immediately saw that as a red flag, no one would have any basis for running up to that FReeper and saying, “Hey! You just ran afoul of James 2-3!!” Nonsense. You might as well say that St. James is not being “gentle, merciful and full of good fruits” when he calls his listeners “adulterers” (James 4:4) in the very same letter!
No... the author of the article was steeped in moral relativism, and that’s one of (perhaps) many reasons why the Gospel tastes sour in his mouth. I don’t doubt that many millenials (and others) have had bad experiences; no sane person wants to minimize that, as a rule. But the reasoning in the article is puerile and self-centered, and it’s neither unbiblical nor unkind to point that fact out.
We’re all sinners. Most of us have really good self control and mental health though. Some of us need a filter and a censor on occasion. But unfortunately some of us are power hungry activists who want to censor free speech. God bless the Free Republic!
Probably shouldn’t have posted it. Remember, whatsoever is true and of good report, think on these things. So help us out next time. : )
Nice cite!
just left my church, in which i had been quite active and held leadership positions, after 15 years. the idiots thought it would be “reaching out” to extend a call to a gay pastor.
“””Not much makes me angrier than seeing those articles that make the rounds on Facebook every few months.””””
I know how to fix that. Turn off the idiotic facebook.
No, he said it was intellectually non-challenging. I can agree. I used to be an active member in a Southern Baptist church that used Lifeway Sunday School curriculum. The difference between the adult and children's classes was the crayons. The adult class material was antiseptic and I've seen deeper bottle caps. In another church, we set aside the "approved" class material and had an adult bible study, directly from the actual bible, and had some great discussions about it. The class tripled in size in less than two months. The Minister of Education found out and put the kybosh on that. The class went from about 40 or 50 down to 10.
You keep telling them what they want is not acceptable, but every other outlet tells them it’s ok.
The article never said that. It didn't even hint at it.
And..every time we’ve “ trusted” an elder, we’ve gotten screwed.
I've seen it happen more than a few times. One of my best friends was a PK and grew up moving from town to town because his dad would be called to a church and grew to become loved and trusted. This inevitably threatened the power or popularity of someone else in the church hierarchy, and he would eventually be driven out. My friend is an agnostic now. I blame so-called "Christians" for hurting him like this when he was a kid. He's 45 and still bitter about it. His dad still preaches and moves every 18 months or so.
...And when you start to realize that church isn’t the safe place you thought it was...
If God didn't spare His own son, where would anyone ever get the idea that church is a "safe place"? It's a Holy place, and Holy places are extremely dangerous. That's why the High Priest had a rope tied around his ankle when he entered the Sanctum Sanctorum. It was so they could drag his dead carcass out if he made the slightest mistake.
I liked the story about the excommunication and readmission of Abraham Piper. I did not know about that.
Not wanting to get into a war here-— I was summing up what I’ve heard from my kids friends. I have no problem with church or god or Jesus.
I should have made that more clear.
It wasn't the label (which I loathe, due to reasons you state) per se, but the dismissal of everything said/presented because the author used it.
The common “canonical” usage of the LGB[...] term is one of granting that these are “alternate versions of normal”... which is about as antithetical to Christian morality as you can get.
Yes, that tends to be the common usage; however, if one is speaking from a culture where the term is oft used there is a tendency to use the term as well... perhaps disregarding the implicit canonical connotation (perhaps for expediency's sake).
When the author of the article decried the ostracization of, quote, “LGBTQ persons”, and when a FReeper immediately saw that as a red flag, no one would have any basis for running up to that FReeper and saying, “Hey! You just ran afoul of James 2-3!!” Nonsense. You might as well say that St. James is not being “gentle, merciful and full of good fruits” when he calls his listeners “adulterers” (James 4:4) in the very same letter!
I see your point; however, my concern wasn't the author but the poster I was replying to who seemed to me to be dismissing the person based solely upon their usage of the LGBQ[...] label. As evidenced by their own post.
No... the author of the article was steeped in moral relativism, and that’s one of (perhaps) many reasons why the Gospel tastes sour in his mouth.
Oh, I can see that; I'm not agreeing with the conclusions, or even all of his points.
It just seems to me that utterly dismissing him because of the term's usage is harsh, without mercy... and, much like confronting an authoritarian the slightest imperfection used to deem your entire problem/issue/argument moot.
I don’t doubt that many millenials (and others) have had bad experiences; no sane person wants to minimize that, as a rule. But the reasoning in the article is puerile and self-centered, and it’s neither unbiblical nor unkind to point that fact out.
And I grant all those as possible, probable even; it just seems counter-productive to slam the door in their face
because they use a particular term. Nowhere am I saying we should smile, hug, and accept LGBTQWERTY as normal and good — but if you drive them away, how can they be introduced to the God Who Heals? Like one of my FRiends who commented "they're still a bunch of perverts" to an article describing Signs of Spiritual Awakening in Japan, it denies the transformative power of our God.
Where is the concept of wisdom?
where is the concept of holiness?
Where is the concept of daily conversion?
Where is the concept of a relationship with God?
Sheesh, that's some apostasy. I hope God leads you to a great denomination/congregation soon!
I’m sorry to hear about your (PK) friend’s experience... but don’t you think there’s something of a disconnect between his view of the world and the Bible? Somewhere along the line, didn’t he hear (or didn’t internalize, or didn’t connect the dots) about St. Paul being booted from pillar to post, almost always because the “popular religious leaders” had their pride in a knot? Why did he become an agnostic in reaction to his father being treated like St. Paul? If persecution causes your kids to fall away, it’s possible that their own free will (and erratic formation by the culture) led them away, that’s true... but it could also be a lack of pointing out that the Gospel is REAL (with a real war to go with it, with real casualties—”blessed are you when they persecute you on account of My Name”, etc., is a pre-emptive war report, not platitude-laden fluff!). I won’t presume to judge on that point... but I do know that no one has any GOOD reason to flee the Church, simply because fellow sinners in the Body of Christ persecute him, ack like jerks, and the like. We either trust Christ (despite our lack of taste for the tools He chooses—Romans 8:28, Colossians 1:24, 1 Peter 4:13, etc.), or we don’t.
Well... okay, but: who said anything about driving them away? When we point out that even the uncritical, unqualified USE of the “LGB[etc.” term is a tacit admission of “legitimacy” for those categories (and “sexual sin, mental illness, sexual disorder” would be the true descriptors of those conditions), then anyone who uses them in such a manner is definitely “tipping his hand” in regard to the thoughts of his mind and heart. The plaintive cry of “Don’t drive me away because I’m gay!” is very often their OWN rendering/hearing of someone who, in reality, said, “Your choices are diseased and sinful, and they will lead you to spiritual death! I love you too much to let you continue on that path unchallenged... and no, we’re not instituting any “programs” which would confirm you in your disordered lifestyle. We want you to stay; but we hate the sin you love, with a passion, and we won’t rest until it’s dead!”
Loving the sinner does not mean “playing nice” or “watering down one’s words” for them... much less soft-pedaling the Gospel for the sake of sin-sensitive ears. Someone who’s dying of snakebite needs an injection of antivenin (and possibly a very painful cut and extraction of the poison), not a misplaced mercy which allows them to die without being offended or cut or stuck with a needle.
To let someone hear a Christian “confirm” a sinful stance (for the sake of being “sensitive” and “pastoral”), or even refuse an opportunity to condemn it (while making a clear distinction between sinner and sin) is NOT loving. It’s as good a working definition of “hate” as I can imagine. It’s tantamount to saying to them, “I’m willing to let you die, rather than suffer through the unpleasantness of having you be angry with me, hate me, let people think that I cruelly drove you away from the Church, etc. I’d rather see you damned than to see myself suffer.” That’s hatred, friend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.