Women and the Social Gospel

Another discussion from the Global Pastors Network...

John Deacon, VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies Limited

One thing that's wrong with Christianity is the near absence of women in leadership, women as spokespersons for the faith, women theologians and indeed women's voices in this Global Pastors Network. 
Not that there aren't women present but too often they are seen as tag alongs, beside their man, supporting their husband but not accorded their full weight in voice, message and authority.
We can do better but the matter of how is something worth separate discussion. 

Howard Nason, Associate Pastor for missions at Northstar Church of God

AMEN! Brother John. I don't need to rehash comments from another discussion about women in ministry. God makes no exceptions to the call to ministry based on gender and neither should we. 

Agape, 

Howard 

Doug Greenwold, Senior Teaching Fellow at Preserving Bible Times, Inc.
Top Contributor

Howard, 

Depends on how you define "headship" as Paul uses it. Can a man be the spiritual head (having authority over) of his house and then go to church and have his wife be the pastor who exercises authoritative discipline over him? I don't think so. 

Once women are put in positions of spiritual leadership and authority over men, the unintended consequences become significant. Take any 100 women in the church and any 100 men and you will find that the women are invariably more spiritually mature than the men (statistically). Therefore if women are put in positions of authority over men, eventually the men will become "no shows. And what you have left is a matriarchal church. Think I'm kidding. Go into the intercity and take a census of those store front churches. You will find mostly women in leadership, the men are gone, and you are hard pressed to even find a teenage boy. The Black community demonstrates this reality in many ways. 

There is a reason God put one, and only one leadership position in the Church of Jesus Christ off limits to women. Just like the garden of Eden, there are many leadership trees that woman can pursue, but the position of spiritual authority over men is the one leadership tree not to be made available to women. it's God's way of protecting his church over the long haul. 

Not a popular message in today's let's-remove-all-glass-ceilings-for-women contemporary culture. But I am convinced that is the Word of God and we have to be very careful when we let the world's egalitarian culture force us into its mold. 

From a historical perspective, it has been of interest to me that the same creative hermeneutic that was used to justify women in the pulpit is now being used to justify gay and lesbian pastors. That should tell you something right there. 

Just a thought. 

Doug

Howard Nason, Associate Pastor for missions at Northstar Church of God

Doug, 

I have to disagree, every church i've pastored had about an equal number of men and women and in every one of the five churches the leadership was predominately men and in one church 60% of the congregation on any given Sunday were men. We had a storefront church for about a year and the congregation was pretty evenly divided. My wife and I shared leadership and none of the male staff resented her leadership. Since you have not posted a profile I can only surmise by the name of your organization that you want it to be just like Bible Times and you want women to be subserviant and second class citizens. I find your closing sentence offensive and reeking with hatred. Its your historical perspective not mine. By the way, how about posting hyour profile, you are free to peruse mine any time you want. 

Agape, 

Howard 

John Deacon, VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies Limited

Doug: 

The issue of women in leadership is a contentious one but one that finds substantiation biblically. Among those Paul commends in leadership at the end of his letters to the Romans and to the Philippians are women. Among those he recognizes in Christian leadership before him were women. Priscilla and Aquila are examples of a couple whose ministry was deemed equal in the church. Philip had daughters who were prophets, which again were gifts of leadership and authority. 

True the Lord had 12 male disciples. But then the first witnesses of his resurrection were women and Jesus tore strips off his disciples for not believing what the women had told them about his rising from the dead. 

Each generation of the church has occasion to advance the freedom Jesus initiated with his death and resurrection. 
Slavery which the Bible doesn't take issue with, is nonetheless an issue the Lord tackled in the succeeding generations of the church. The same could be said about his overturning child labour laws, setting up hospitals to care for the sick, and institutions making education available to all. 

The Women's Suffrage Movement in both the US and Canada were lead by Christian women convinced of the equality God intended when He made them 'male and female in his image.' 

As one who is familiar with storefront churches especially as they impact high risk neighbourhoods in many of North America's urban centres, their presence if anything validates the truth of God's calling women into ministry and leadership. It scares me to think of how abandoned these communities would be were it not for the presence of God through these caring ministries. The fact they are more lead by women is a testament to their courage, their willingness to risk all, which we could all wish were more characteristic of men in Christian leadership. 

But leaving aside the issue of women in leadership, isn't something fundamentally wrong in Christianity when the dire issues facing women: poverty, imprisonment, genital mutilation, physical and mental abuse, etc. are ones which most churches choose to be silent about? Given the repeated advocacy Jesus made for the abused women in his day, this is grievous, a betrayal of the equality Christ calls men and women to: 
"For you are all children of God through faith in Christ Jesus. And all who have been united with Christ in baptism have put on Christ, like putting on new clothes. There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:26-28 NLT 

Until the church mirrors this kind of equality, we can't claim to being 'his new creation.'

Doug Greenwold, Senior Teaching Fellow at Preserving Bible Times, Inc.

Howard, 

I'm pleased you have had good experiences with men and women in your five churches. But that antedotal experience doesn't mean you can project that over all aspects of Christiandom. 

In the 1980's I spend years reading about the two competing perspectives on women in ecclesiastical authority over men. Wrote a couple of hundred pages on them. One was the historical biblical perspective which Jim Hurley develops in his book "Men and Women in Biblical Perspective." I found him to be balanced and thorough. In constrast to that, I also read a lot of recent creative hermeneutical work since the 1960's which I classify as the "Contemporary Egalitarian Perspective." This latter perspective has much to overcome, and I have found it wanting in trying to do so. The man/woman relationship is woven into creation's design - Adam was the first born, Eve's rib came from Adam and was to be his helpmate, Adam named Eve (the one who names in the OT economy is the one who has authority over), and all of this is pre-fall. Then in the NT we have Paul's requirement that Elders be men, etc. 

Having said that, I realize the easy, keep-em happy, easy to market, is to succumb to the cultural pressure and leave the historical biblical perspective of 19 centuries and embrace the new egalitariam perspective (paint in hardly even dry on it). But that doesn't make it God's way. 

Remember, I am only contending for the ecclesiastical authority issue - women are free to provide leadership in another 100 different ways. It's just that they should not be put in positions where they can disciple or excommunicate a man for reason previously articuled. 

I had to smile when you said I "reeked with hate" by simply observing that the same creative hermeneutic that people use to justify women in the pulpit is being recycled to justify gay and lesbians in the pulpit. I don't think the hundreds of people who know me would have ever enterained such a thought! When people say, "Well, Paul didn't really mean that, and here is some contextual gymnastics we can use to get around it to justify women as elders; that is exactly the approach taken by those promoting the gay/lesbian agenda for the pulpit. 

That's a small part of my perspective. 

Shalom, 

Kurt Kelley,  Bassist/Vocalist at Treehouse Productions. Community Outreach Worker, Volunteer at Nursing Homes, Churches, etc...

Wow Simon, you sure love to make broad assumptions! 
1) I dont hate Conservatives. I hate how the term Christianity has become convoluted and corrupted into a political cultural term, instead of referring simply to Christ. 

2) Communism and Socialism are nothing alike. Communism is what ruined Russia and Eastern Europe, and still has Cuba suffering today. Whereas, Socialism is what they have in Canada, Australia, much of Western Europe. Ive been to Canada dozens of times, growing up across the river in Detroit, and I live in Australia. One thing I know...Despite the misinformed hype, Canadians and Aussies LOVE their national healthcare. Plus, Canada and Australia are continually ranked higher than the USA in personal lifestyle satisfaction 

3) Im sorry to hear of your hatred of gays and liberals. Why? Because they are sinners? I guess then you must hate yourself too, because, you are also a sinner. Sure is a good thing Jesus doesnt feel the same way you do about sinners. 

Simon, IM curious as to how you feel about the passages at the end of Acts 2, and Acts 4, giving detailed descriptions of a collective community oriented attitude and mindset that sounds an awful lot like a 1st Century version of Socialism. Where everyone lived in community, and shared all of their possessions. Those who had excess gave to those who didnt have enough. Ooh, scary!! 

4) Acts 2:42 They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43 Everyone was filled with awe at the many wonders and signs performed by the apostles. 44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. 46 Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47 praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved. 

4: 32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all 34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need. 

36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”), 37 sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet.

So how many Conservative Christians have you ever heard of who sold property, in order to give the profit towards those in need? 

Sad, how you ignore the bible verses that put personal greed, and selfish ambition in the same context and category as sexual immorality. 

Simon, I have Scripture to back up my position. How about you? (Conservative doctrine, and the Constitution is NOT scripture. Nor is Rush Limbaugh a saint, or an Apostle) Perhaps you should try reading A) the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man. (an allegory that perfectly describes wealthy American Christians, and their complacency towards the rest of the world, that is hurting both for basic resources, and the Gospel) 
And B) the Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector. You seem so certain that your sins are less severe than the liberal or homosexual. Jesus was pretty clear about that mindset. I can picture you at the temple, Simon. Standing tall, boasting about your own righteousness. Thanking God that you are not like that liberal, or that homosexual sinner.

Kurt Kelley, Bassist/Vocalist at Treehouse Productions. Community Outreach Worker, Volunteer at Nursing Homes, Churches, etc...

Addendum: I do not live in Australia now. I LIVED in Australia in 1991 and 1997.

Doug Greenwold, Senior Teaching Fellow at Preserving Bible Times, Inc.

John, 

I am well aware of how contentious this issue can be having lived through it in multiple church settings in different decades. In the 1980's I spent years reading about the two competing perspectives on women in ecclesiastical authority over men. Wrote a couple of hundred pages contrasting them. One was the historical biblical perspective which Jim Hurley develops in his book "Men and Women in Biblical Perspective," which I found to be balanced and thorough. In constrast to that, I also read a lot of recent creative hermeneutical work since the 1960's which I classify as the "Contemporary Egalitarian Perspective." This latter perspective has much to overcome, and I have found it lacking in exegetical and hermeneutical gravitas. I really do believe that the man/woman relationship is woven into creation's design - Adam was the first born, Eve's rib came from Adam and was to be his helpmate, Adam named Eve (the one who names in the OT economy is the one who has authority over), and all of this is pre-fall (which the egalitarians want to overlook). Then in the NT we have Paul's requirement that Elders be men, etc. 

Having said that, I realize the easy, keep-em happy, easy to market, is to succumb to the cultural pressure and leave the historical biblical perspective of 19 centuries and embrace the new egalitariam perspective (paint is hardly even dry on its logic). But that doesn't make it God's way. We don't raise hands and count them to determine God's Way. 

Remember, I am only contending for the ecclesiastical authority issue - women are free to provide leadership in the church in another 100 different ways. It's just that they should not be put in positions of authoritynwhere they can discipline or excommunicate a man for reasons articuled in a prior response. Suggesting that because Phillip had two daughters who prophesied means they exercised spiritual authority over men on an on-going basis in a body life setting is too much of a stretch for me. The citation of "male and female in His image" simply attests that both men and women are designed to be relational and to have a relationship with God. That is phrase is silent on the issue of ecclesiatical authority. Same for Romans "neither male nor female;" contextuially that is talking about salvation, not church leadership. 

That women have taken over leadership in many intercity churches is certainly better than having no leadership at all. I would agree. But it does not change the consequences and outcome that the more they took over leadership, the more men left over time. 

Yep, men have not always done a very good job of being spiritual leaders. Yep, men even abuse women with their misguided authority. But as we learn in Logic 101, abuse is never an argument for disuse. You don't correct that abuse by throwing the baby out with the bath water. 

Just a thought. 

Shalom, 


Ed Considine -Trinity College Graduate-Jerusalem University-

Only Satan goes outside of scripture who moves those who false teach to bring in damnable heresies and strange doctrines that are not of Jesus Christ of whom we are his disciples. Paul is the apostle to the gentiles that filled up what was left behind of the sufferings of Jesus Christ by an appointed dispensation of Grace. Pauline Theology is hated in todays world of the social gospel because the world hates God. Paul and Peter make clear what the relationship of men and women are in the church. NO ONE SHOULD GO BEYOND what the apostles of Jesus Christ say about the Doctrine ( That is the teaching of Jesus Christ ) Of Jesus Christ which were guided by The Spirit of Jesus Christ, The Spirit of Truth that guides us into all truth. This Truth sets us free. PS: It is The Fathers Doctrine!

John Snowdy, Owner, JSE Graphics. Print & Web Desgin, Global Video Marketing

Oh boy...not sure where to start on this one. I saw the post awhile ago and had some immediate responses but never took to time to get into the discussion. So here it goes. 

Asking what is wrong with Christianity is like asking what is wrong with civilization, Nothing, except for the fact that it is comprised of people. 

I've heard people that did not know any better say that Jesus started Christianity (no one in this discussion) But I wonder how many of us remember that Jesus was NOT a Christian. In fact, please correct me if I am wrong, even His disciples were not Christians, they were Jews that, like most of the early church, were attempting to live their lives according the teachings of Jesus. And as a result were called Christians by those that chose not to. 

Christianity is not a thing, a religion, an institution, a denomination, a title or position. It is a relationship with the Lord On High. If you are in Him and He dwells in you then you are a Christian. 

If we would all ( and I do include myself ) keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, Christianity would be just fine. Just sayin' 

God Bless

Simon Zelikman, at Emmanuel's Doorpost

Kelley, 

Your ... 
""I hate the term 'Christianity', because it has become corrupted by a false identity with c, and conservative American politics...""""" 
Sure does equate to "hate" of ..."conservative American politics", "conservative Americans", and "Christianity"! 

You also twist My words with Your lies ...""3) Im sorry to hear of your hatred of gays and liberals...""" 
I did Not say I hate Liberals or Gays, I said I hate the Liberal Gay Marriage and Abortion for all paid by all, and so on,..... As in, their (Liberals) ideas, forced on all, and a must to be excepted by all, or be labeled as bigot, and right wing this or that, zealot and so on. 
A whole lot like you! 

Don't know of Australia, but Canada I do know a little about and I can guarantee you for sure, No Way do all Canadians LOVE their health care, That, is a LIE! 
Many die waiting for their turn to be "cared" for, or get far sicker while suffering hoping for their turn. Canadians who have money, have no problem, or they go were they can get good care. 

Canada and Australia are Capitalist, they are free to pursue their personal goals within their laws, which govern all. 

Russia and Eastern Europe were Socialists, and I know a little about it having grown up there. 
Cuba is a good example of "community" living, and a Liberal like Sean Penn and Roger More LOVE! their health care, and want us to have it just as good, again a lot like YOU! 

Christ was NOT against prosperity, and the Father always wanted His people to prosper, this is FACT! and yes I can provide scripture! 
Christ taught to Not be "obsessed" with riches, but pursuit of happiness and prosperity for your family is NOT a sin! 
Joseph purchased that tomb for Christ, the anointing oil Mary anointed Him with cost a lot of money, do you soothsayers have a problem with that too? 

Conservative Christian Americans are far more generous with their giving then Liberals, which is also a FACT! 

I am willing to bet that Rush Limbaugh, who may not be a saint as You claim, but he gives a lot more to charities, every year, then Obama, Biden and Kerry combined! 
You want to find GREEDY Americans, look to Liberal Democrats, Not the Conservative Christians, who are the most generous people anywhere! 

You Kurt Kelly are full of ......... hot air, and do You think a happily married, actively practicing their Gay lifestyle, ........... would be welcomed into the Temple by Christ and the Father, or maybe an abortion provider with his well yearned tithing money? 
Do You Kurt Kelley? 
Why don't You Kurt Kelley tell us some more about that Hateful Christian Conservative?! 


Dear, Dear Brothers, are we getting any clearer on what is wrong with that so "Hated" 
"Christianity" today, ........... yet?

John Deacon, VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies Limited

There's a story about a UK magazine asking for written entries in response to the question:
'What is wrong with the world?'
GK Chesterton the prolific and brilliant journalist submitted an entry with these two words:
'I am.'

Which in summary is the problem with any discussion about what's wrong with Christianity, with the country we live in, and the world we share. We can't get to the solution without identifying ourselves as part of the problem.

We are the problem built with an inner self-justification mechanism that fights God's will every step of the way.
And so we take the commands Jesus gave of selling one's possessions and turning the other cheek and loving one's enemies and we re-define them to suit our own purposes. In doing so we deplete and undermine and contradict the very words Jesus said to instead live lives that aren't not much different than our neighbour next door who has nothing to do with Jesus.
And then we ask ourselves the question: 'What's wrong with Christianity?' as though it's not connected to how far we have distanced ourselves from the radical way of life Jesus calls us to!

But rather than land on that negative assessment, I find myself responding to the question of 'what's wrong with Christianity?' as though the Lord himself might be interested in helping us!
Let me float this idea.

Just Jesus sets out in every generation to save people - some from prostitution, some from greed, some from religious arrogance, some from misplaced zealotry; he too saves people from institutional sins like slavery, ignorance, racism, prejudice, hatred, social and economic injustice etc. This is by no means a stretch - it is consistent with Jesus insistence that 'the Spirit of the Lord is upon me to...' (see Luke 4: 18,19) and God's breaking the shackles of the Egyptians to set his people free under Moses.

What is it in our time that Jesus is doing to set people free from long-standing oppression and captivity? For those of us having lived 50 years - we have seen the fall of the Iron Curtain, the implementation of civil rights legislation in the US, the dismantling of apartheid in South Africa without civil war, comprehensive and caring responses to the global crisis of AIDS, malnutrition and movement in the direction of gender equality, universal healthcare and education. 
No doubt, in all of these areas there is a long way to go - but in many of these 'deliverances' not only is Christ at work, but alongside him, his church. In fulfilling his command to love our neighbour, Christians have stood with the most vulnerable and great changes have occurred - which without the Lord's involvement would have never changed!

For freedom is the Lord's business however and wherever it occurs. And it is occurring in more ways than we know!
Some of what's wrong with Christianity has to do with our inability to see the Lord at work. 
Lord open our eyes!

Doug Greenwold, Senior Teaching Fellow at Preserving Bible Times, Inc.

John, 

Great point. The narcissism of this age has indeed found its way into the church. And if we are not careful, spiritual narcissism (what's in it for me) could easily become the malignant condition of the Western Evangelical church. Discipleship is less and less about picking up one's cross daily and following Jesus and more and more a journey into personal self-development - as if Jesus is the next best thing to Dr. Phil. Just listen to the conversations in our fellowships - my calling, my ministry, my Spiritual Gifts, even my Jesus. Maybe we should ban the use of the word "my" for a year in the church substituting "His" and "our" instead. As Snoopy once said to Lucy (or maybe vice versa), "I have found the enemy and it is us." 

Just a thought. 


John Deacon, VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies Limited

Doug: 

I appreciate your response to the women in leadership dilemma and respectfully disagree - having lived through the same 1980's debate on the issue. One of the books I reference on the subject is Dr. Gilbert Bilezikian's 'Beyond Sex Roles'. As you know the good doctor had a huge role in the founding of the Willowcreek Church in Chicago. 

The bigger debate which well exceeds the confines of this discussion is whether we understand the working of God's Spirit in his Church as static or progressive. I lean towards the latter, allowing for the vulnerability and logical inconsistencies of such a position. The reason I take such liberty is the Lord did the same with the law of Moses: 'you have heard it said. But I say unto you...' thereby changing what it means to love your enemies, what the Sabbath is all about, the triumph of mercy over judgement, etc. Much of what Jesus was changing about divorce, retribution, sabbath etc were God's own words to Moses! 

Could it be that he is still at work changing longstanding prejudices against women, against minorities, against gays and other population segments Christians are more inclined to persecute than love? 
I don't know and I'm not sure you do either.

Doug Greenwold, Senior Teaching Fellow at Preserving Bible Times, Inc.

John, 

I remember Bilezikian's work well. One of the creative new exegetical and hermeneutical works that arrived on the horizon to try and undo the historical biblical perspective on men and women. It and others opened the door to the logic of "if even experts can't agree, why are we making such a big deal of this. Let's just to it." Did you ever wonder why works like Bilezikian's, which first started with Nancy Hardesty in the late sixities, coincided with the rise of radical feminism in American? Doesn't it seem strange that suddenly we were able to redefine our understanding of about a dozen key passages on this subject in a new way? What's the probability that all of those dozen passages were "wrongly" handled over 19 Centuries, but now in the 20th Century we are handling them "rightly" with a new understanding To me it just points out how much the church is vulnerable to societal trends, with some falling over themselves to try to respond (even pander) to them. Strikes me as practical theology via sociology! 

That's God's Spirit is alway moving and at work is a given. But great care needs to be taken when people approach the Scriptures and confuse a timeless principle with a practice of a certin period. Because when you think you've demonstrated that a certain practice is no longer in vogue (women and head dressings) that does not allow you to therefore throw out the timeless principle - make headship. 

It's increasingly lonely defending the historical biblical perspective on men and women in the Kingdom. It's not a great way to make friends. I spent three decades in sales and markeing and I know how much easier it is these days to "sell" the new creative exegesis and hermeneutic (to people lacking critical thinking skills- I'm sure you are the exception - who don't understand either exegesis or hermeneutics) than to defend the historical biblical position. But The Holy Spirit hasn't released me to do that. 

Today's thought. 

John Deacon, VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies Limited

Doug:

Love the way you think and know that were we part of the same neighbourhood and church community, our disagreements may be many but our sense of brotherhood strong! 
I have some feeling for your loneliness, though not in the area of 'historical biblical perspective.' 
Mine is more in the area of my vocation - I am a business person swimming upstream against the strong currents of greed, personal gain at the expense of my poor neighbour, unfettered capitalism - in short: 'the politics of Cain.' See http://www.homelessguide.com/2011/07/politics-and-religion.html

I do think that sometimes God uses the world to provoke, remind and re-awaken Christians what we are to be about. Gandhi reminded Christians that there is substance to the Sermon on the Mount; that Christians were meant to live as though turning the other cheek and loving one's enemies weren't just platitudes but God's expectation of how we as Christians should be living. 
As extreme as the feminist movement was, it brought to the fore the inequality of men and women both in the world and in the church and reminded us 'that male and female, God made them in his image.' 
Would the Christian churches in the US and the Christian churches in South Africa be forced to revise their theology against blacks had it not been for Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Stephen Biko and Nelson Mandela?

Doug Greenwold, Senior Teaching Fellow at Preserving Bible Times, Inc.

John, 

While the Bible has been abused to justify slavery, it does not therefore follow that the Bible is wrong and should be ignored. Just because men have not done their best to honor women when they (men) where in ecclesiastical leadership does not mean therefore that the historical biblical perspective on men and women has to be overthrown. Rather it means we have to correct the abuse and restore it to God's intended balance. 

Food is good, but food can be abused into obesity. That does not make food inherently bad. Water is good, but too much water imbibed changes the elecrolyte balance in the bloodstream risking cardiac death. That does not make water bad. In fact in many parts of the world, water is life sustaining. The fact that something can be abused, does not mean it is inherently wrong and needs to be discarded. It just means we have to correct the inbalance and bring it back to the middle of the road wher moderation is to be found. 

An old pastor once said there are ditches on both sides of every road. Just because the historial biblical perspective has been abused by fallen men inappropriately put into leadership positions does not mean we should throw it out and go to the ditch on the other side of the road with a new creative hermeneutic that puts women in positions of ecclesiatical power and authority over men. That is a slow, but inevitable slide toward a matriarichal church. Rather it means we men have to repent and bring our God endowed leadership back to the middle of the road doing everything we can to develop and put women into leadership in dozens of roles and postions that do not have ecclesiatical authority in their job decription. 

Have to teach a week-long "Bible Alive" contextual immersion experience starting this afternoon to pastors, leades, authors and serious students of the Bible. Something I love to do. We deal with biblical geography, culture, literary form, history, and the visualization of passage sites to discern "original meaning" of the text. Very exciting. And we won't get within six miles of this men and women leadership issue! So I will now be email quiet for the better part of a week. 

Shalom, Shalom, 

Kurt Kelley, Bassist/Vocalist at Treehouse Productions. Community Outreach Worker, Volunteer at Nursing Homes, Churches, etc...

John Deacon, speak up. Youre Canadian. How do you feel about your national healthcare system, versus the American free market, great if you can afford it, healthcare system? And, do you know of any of your Canadian compatriots who would prefer the American system over the Canadian system?

Kurt Kelley, Bassist/Vocalist at Treehouse Productions. Community Outreach Worker, Volunteer at Nursing Homes, Churches, etc...

Simon, has anyone ever told you you seem angry alot? Anyway, concerning Conservative Christians, pretty much all of my Christian friends here in South Florida are strict conservatives politically. Thats just the nature of the area here. Most white conservative Christians live a lifestyle that insulates and isolates them from the common problems that plague the urban areas that lie safely outside of their gated cul de sac communities. Since they never interact with those outside their culture, they rarely develop any understanding or empathy for those that are different. 

Concerning homosexual marriage, I would never go to a church that endorsed, or approved of homosexual marriage, or that ordained homosexual leadership or staff. I never said it wasnt a sin. WHat Ive been saying is that, in Gods eyes, we are ALL sinners, and ALL equally in need of God's grace and forgiveness. There is no levels of sin. THATS my problem with Conservative mindset. They single out the sins they personally dont struggle with, in order to try to portray those sins as worse than their own. That is exactly what the Pharisees did. 

Paul was clear about us NOT judging those outside the church. He said to expell the evildoer from AMONG you. Do not associate with one who calls himself a brother, but indulges in evil behaviour. However, it is up to GOD to judge those OUTSIDE the church. They havent been enlightened to the Truth that sets them free. How can you expect them to behave as if they have been? 

Simon, let me ask you. What is it that makes you a Christian? Jesus, or your own righteous behaviour? And what brought you to Christ in the first place? His grace and invitation? Or did you change your behaviour first, in order to make yourself acceptable in His eyes? Our call and commission is not to force unbelievers to behave, think, and live like we do. Our call and commission is to introduce them to the only one who CAN save them and redeem them from their self destructive behaviours, and HE cleans them and changes their hearts.

John Deacon, VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies Limited

Dear Kurt:
Thanks for your appeal for me to speak up about the Canadian health care system. I have done this elsewhere as Simon can attest to, since it has come up before in previous discussion groups.
If the issue being debated here was: 'What's wrong with the US that isn't wrong about Canada?', not only I but about 30 million other Canadians would say our health care system. 
But since that isn't the issue, I am going to leave it be.

Ed Considine -Trinity College Graduate-Jerusalem University-

John, 

Who defends Jesus Christ? Who' s Spirit is that? Does that Spirit need our Help? This is the relationship between Faith and Grace? WHAT IS YOUR FAITH? WHAT IS AND WAS AND WILL BE OUR SAVIOURS FAITH? 


John Deacon, VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies Limited

Dear Ed: 

Your question reminds me of something Charles Spurgeon wrote: 

'A great many learned men are defending the gospel; no doubt it is a very proper and 
right thing to do, yet I always notice that, when there are most books of that kind, it 
is because the gospel itself is not being preached. 
Suppose a number of persons were to take it into their heads that they had to defend a lion, a full-grown king of beasts! There he is in the cage, and here come all the soldiers of the army to fight for him. 
Well, I should suggest to them, if they would not object, and feel that it was humbling 
to them, that they should kindly stand back, and open the door, and let the lion out! 
I believe that would be the best way of defending him, for he would take care of himself; and the best “apology” for the gospel is to let the gospel out.'

Ed Considine -Trinity College Graduate-Jerusalem University-

Brother John,

I agree with you 100% about the Gospel. ( good news there is forgiveness for the sin of the world ) Let us however agree to the penalty of today's Social Gospel: --> "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." 
The Holy Bible : King James Version. electronic ed. of the 1769 edition of the 1611 Authorized Version. Bellingham WA : Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1995, S. Ga 1:6-9

Brother ED

John Deacon, VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies Limited

Brother Ed: 
The social gospel is not another gospel. It is the gospel alongside the gospel of personal salvation. It is not aimed at just individuals but at nations. Not only as individuals will we stand at the judgment seat of Christ, but as nations as well. 
Trying to sever one from the other is like separating sodium from chloride. Together they make salt, separate from each other they are worthless. 
Acts Chapter 2 is the evidence of the working of the gospel on both individual and community. They were the city set on a hill - not only giving evidence to individuals of the power of Christ, but to all society of what God's kingdom looks like - a social entity where there were no poor among them and possessions belong to all.

Ed Considine -Trinity College Graduate-Jerusalem University-

John, 

I disagree with your analysis of a social gospel. Let me repeat again what The Word Of God has to say about the record God gave about His Son which is The Gospel Of Jesus Christ in case you did not hear it: --> "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." 
The Holy Bible : King James Version. electronic ed. of the 1769 edition of the 1611 Authorized Version. Bellingham WA : Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1995, S. Ga 1:6-9 


Howard Nason, Associate Pastor for missions at Northstar Church of God

@ ALL please read Matthew 25 verses 31-46. That is Jesus' social gospel, its a part of our witness as Christians, so please stop your foolish disputations and get about our Father's business. Its the most rewarding and powerful demonstration of God's love and His grace that He allows us to be Hismessangers of the Gospel and the dispensers of His mercy. 

Agape, 

John Deacon, VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies Limited

Ed:
It could be that your resistance to 'the social gospel' is in the context of its emergence in the history of American Christianity.

One definition of the social gospel reads:
"A religious movement that arose in the United States in the late nineteenth century with the goal of making the Christian churches more responsive to social problems, such as poverty and prostitution. Leaders of the movement argued that Jesus' message was as much about social reform as about individual approaches to salvation."

Its emergence created a split in American Christianity between the 'Fundamentalists' - Christians alarmed by the watering down of the fundamentals of the faith concerning the virgin birth, the resurrection, the divinity of Christ etc - and those Christians who discarded such 'fundamentals' to emphasize the social ramifications of what Christ taught.

Like all splits, there were truths embodied in each and truths forsaken by each - to the detriment of both sides. In separating one from the other both were disabled. For Christ embodies both individual and social gospel. He not only transforms the human heart, he transforms societies. He calls us not only to be individual witnesses, but into community where he is the head with each of us unique and yet belonging to one another.

The gospel is both individual and community because God is both individual and community. Not only are we to be witnesses of the fundamentals of the faith; corporately we are the witness of God's new creation, his visible presence in the world.

Referencing the particular passage you've quoted twice from Galatians - the 'other gospel' was something other than the 'social gospel.'

"Oh, foolish Galatians! Who has cast an evil spell on you? For the meaning of Jesus Christ’s death was made as clear to you as if you had seen a picture of his death on the cross. Let me ask you this one question: Did you receive the Holy Spirit by obeying the law of Moses? Of course not! You received the Spirit because you believed the message you heard about Christ. 
How foolish can you be? After starting your Christian lives in the Spirit, why are you now trying to become perfect by your own human effort? 
Have you experienced so much for nothing? Surely it was not in vain, was it?" 
Galatians 3:1-4
The 'other gospel' the Galatians had been bewitched by was that of the Judaizers intent on taking away their freedom in Christ to bring them under the law of Moses, insisting they be circumcised.

There are 2 verses in Galatians which capture both the individual and social components of the gospel.
"In fact, James, Peter, and John, who were known as pillars of the church, recognized the gift God had given me, and they accepted Barnabas and me as their co-workers. They encouraged us to keep preaching to the Gentiles, while they continued their work with the Jews. Their only suggestion was that we keep on helping the poor, which I have always been eager to do." Galatians 2:9,10

Note what is included in the commissioning of Paul and Barnabas by the 'pillars of the church' - Peter, James and John:
They are to 'keep preaching the gospel to the Gentiles' 
AND 
they are to 'keep on helping the poor.'

Going back to the question of 'What's wrong with Christianity and what can we do to fix it?' - it is wrong whenever we try to split the gospel into private or social, into preaching or activism as though one is the enemy of the other. 
We deprive the gospel of its power when we try to divide what God has joined together. We can fix that by agreeing that whatever our ministerial calling: preaching or activism, we are in this together!