Evangelical Leader Blasts Churches' Gender-Neutral Language

Mohler concluded, "If you call God something different, you're talking about a different god."

Amen.

We are the Body of Christ
Jesus intercedes on our behalf with the Father for we have been baptized into His Body and are in Him and He contends with the devil or the spirit of this world for us as Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil when they disputed about the body of Moses, whom they were baptized into, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. The accuser is the spirit of this world that contends for your soul and is the spirit that deceives the self righteous.

Eddie

Eddie,

I think I know what you mean in your post, but I need more clarification.

We know Jesus is Lord, but in quoting from the book of Jude, your wording seems confused.

I don't want to put words in your mouth, so could you re-word so a simple person like myself can understand. Thank you.

God bless.

We know Jesus is Lord,

Really, do we? There is a difference between knowing and knowing. We can't assume that everyone understands the true implications of lordship, or can grasp it by reading the word "Lord" in the Bible or singing "Lord" in our hymns.

It would be worth considering how this desire to delete the term, Lord, has developed.

Let's admit, in the minds of those who reject God is a very distorted view him. Unbelievers tend to associate God with the church and have immense difficulty separating the two. Just ask anyone who rejects God, and they will quickly start talking about how bad the church is, and how the leaders "lord" the institution. That grievous sin has been a horrible plague in the Christian church for centuries, and has turned countless away from our precious Lord.

Our conservative churches are not immune. How many spiritual leaders have been making themselves lord over their congregants while at the same time teaching them that they need to make Jesus their Lord. You can't teach one thing and model another.

How might we best teach the lordship of Christ? How about by modeling a life under his lordship! Will this not be more effective than merely defending correct word usage?

Diane

Phil 2v11, 'and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I'm not debating whether Jesus is Lord or not.

He is.

Whether or not He is Lord of the individual's life or not, whether saved, or not, is a different matter.

If scripture says He is Lord, He is Lord.

If scriptures says every tongue will confess, then guess what?

God bless.

There are some aspects about this news release that disturbs me – and not merely the quotes of the Episcopalian rector.

For one thing, this is not news – this issue surrounding nomenclature has been around for years.

The title chosen by this particular reporter, was deliberately and carefully created – not as an aim to shed light, but to incite controversy – which is exactly what keeps the press in business and feeds the insatiable appetite of the public. So really, this reporter just found a pitiful twig to keep religious controversy burning and make enough smoke to obscure the truth. We shouldn’t take the bate!

Of course, the Lordship of Christ is foundational to the authentic Christian walk. But THAT point never came through in the article. The evangelical pastor, who apparently “blasted” the rector (Note word choice here!) did not shed any light, other than to point out his disapproval, calling it ‘nonsense”.

But wait - what exactly did he call “nonsense’. That is not clear. Is it this one:

We do not pray as though we expect the big guy in the sky to come and fix everything."

I say, this in itself is a good point, and could have been an ideal point to shed light on the meaning of lordship - including what it is NOT (ex God doesn't force anyone into his kingdom; his lordship is NOT like human authoritarianism).

Note also what she said:

"Jesus was a rabbi and teacher. It was a relationship of mentoring, looking up to him for that kind of companionship."

"Jesus – the Lord – called His disciples to follow Him. He did not follow them ... He was not a mere 'mentor' and 'companion,'"

She never implied the emboldened words. Of course we don’t really know, because we only have about three quotes from her – just enough – for the press - that is.

How sad, that we miss so many good opportunities to proclaim our Lord and Savior to a dying world. Too many evangelicals prefer to squabble or defend the rightness of "their" side.

And the press and the media love it too!

Diane

Reply to Enid
We have no such debate.
My goal was to be a peace maker. I see that congregation as being in rebellion and seeking a larger audience. I think the whole thing is a marketing strategy and if Christian don’t handle it by Biblical precepts we may further their goal. We are to warn them but not try to uproot them.

Matthew 18:
Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

The evangelical pastor, who apparently “blasted” the rector (Note word choice here!) did not shed any light, other than to point out his disapproval, calling it ‘nonsense”.

But wait - what exactly did he call “nonsense’. That is not clear.

If you are unsure about what Mohler is referring to them read this [url=http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/179570]article[/url] first. Then this [url=http://www.almohler.com/blog.php]one.[/url]

This should clear up any confusion.

How sad, that we miss so many good opportunities to proclaim our Lord and Savior to a dying world. Too many evangelicals prefer to squabble or defend the rightness of "their" side.

I disagree with your premise. First off, Mohler's "side" is the true, biblical definition of Lord. I believe he did a great job of standing up for truth.

Secondly, how (in your opinion) should Mohler have responded? Should he have said he disagreed with them but still supported their efforts to proclaim Jesus? This is his point, if they teach and preach a different Jesus than what is presented in scripture then they are idolaters proclaiming to be Christians. It is one thing for a new-age cult to talk about worshiping the 'all loving mother', but it is an entirely different story when a "Christian" church does the same.