What are signs that a church is becoming secular?

[Tim]

What are your thoughts of this list? Is your church becoming secular? Are you?

https://carm.org/what-are-signs-church-becoming-secular

1. Teaching that the Bible is not inspired and inerrant.
2. Using books instead of the Bible in Bible study.
3. Teaching that there is more than one way to God besides Jesus.
4. Being embarrassed to say that Jesus is the only way to salvation.
5. Teaching that there is no absolute right and wrong.
6. Being careful to not offend anyone at the expense of Biblical truth.
7. Pastors preaching moralism instead of Christ-centered messages.
8. Approving of homosexuality.
9. Approving of women elders.
10. Not condemning the sins of society.
11. Psychology as an authority on human nature.
12. Use of politically correct terms of the world from the pulpit where those terms replace Biblical values and truths
14. Going to church as a social habit.
15. Prayer as a last resort.
16. Missionaries not sent out or supported.
17. Divorce statistics as common as secular society.
18. Evolution.

 

[Walt]

You forgot using CCM...

 

[T-Bone]

You forgot using CCM...

And ladies wearing pants. 8)

 

[Izdaari]

1. Teaching that the Bible is not inspired and inerrant.
Inspired, yes. Inerrant only in the sense that the Bible is as God intended, for His good purposes, and He made sure that it is.

2. Using books instead of the Bible in Bible study.
Instead of the Bible, bad. Alongside the Bible, often helpful.

3. Teaching that there is more than one way to God besides Jesus.
Jesus is the only way. But He may save those whom He pleases, whether they've heard of Him or not, or declared as His followers or not. It's up to Him.

4. Being embarrassed to say that Jesus is the only way to salvation.
Nothing to be embarrassed about.

5. Teaching that there is no absolute right and wrong.
Of course there is. But not everything is. Some things are culturally relative, personal preference, or simply ambiguous.

6. Being careful to not offend anyone at the expense of Biblical truth.
Yep. Don't be so PC! But also don't be so cocksure you understand all of Biblical truth. One of the top Bible scholars in the world (N.T. Wright) estimates that about 25% of what he teaches his students is wrong... and of course, if he knew which 25%, he'd fix it.

7. Pastors preaching moralism instead of Christ-centered messages.
Agreed. That's an error.

8. Approving of homosexuality.
I do. I don't advocate it, but if you are, it's because God made you that way.

9. Approving of women elders.
I absolutely do! Women should be eligible for all positions in church leadership. Yes, even including the Pope, if you're Catholic.

10. Not condemning the sins of society.
Indeed. But don't just condemn the ones on your fundie-approved list. And don't be a scold. It gets old fast.

11. Psychology as an authority on human nature.
Authority, no. But very useful, yes.

12. Use of politically correct terms of the world from the pulpit where those terms replace Biblical values and truths
What does this mean? Calling gays sodomites? But that isn't even Biblically correct. Read what the prophets said were the sins of Sodom. Hint: they had a pretty long list, and they didn't mention homosexuality. The point is what? Just trying to be as offensive as possible and make them think Christians are insensitive jerks?

13, Hey, what happened to 13?
Superstitious much?

14. Going to church as a social habit.
Agreed. That misses the point. Being part of a community is part of why we go, but not the main purpose.

15. Prayer as a last resort.
It's good to pray when things are that bad. But don't wait 'til then! God would like to hear from you often, just like your mom would.

16. Missionaries not sent out or supported.
Agreed. Missionaries are good.

17. Divorce statistics as common as secular society.
Or even higher! I would guess partly the fault of teaching stupid patriarchal nonsense about marriage.

18. Evolution.
What? Wedded to literal 7-day Creation, are we? Rejection of science is one reason the church is in decline.

 

[Izdaari]

You forgot using CCM...

And ladies wearing pants. 8)

I don't listen to CCM much, and I don't like it as church music. Most of it is schlock.

But not wanting women to wear pants!? Are you promoting public nudity?

 

[Izdaari]

You forgot using CCM...

And ladies wearing pants. 8)

I don't listen to CCM much, and I don't like it as church music. Most of it is schlock.

But not wanting women to wear pants!? Are you promoting public nudity?

I think we are giving nudity a rest.  8)

Sorry, couldn't resist the joke.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

1. Teaching that the Bible is not inspired and inerrant.
Inspired, yes. Inerrant only in the sense that the Bible is as God intended, for His good purposes, and He made sure that it is.

2. Using books instead of the Bible in Bible study.
Instead of the Bible, bad. Alongside the Bible, often helpful.

3. Teaching that there is more than one way to God besides Jesus.
Jesus is the only way. But He may save those whom He pleases, whether they've heard of Him or not, or declared as His followers or not. It's up to Him.

4. Being embarrassed to say that Jesus is the only way to salvation.
Nothing to be embarrassed about.

5. Teaching that there is no absolute right and wrong.
Of course there is. But not everything is. Some things are culturally relative, personal preference, or simply ambiguous.

6. Being careful to not offend anyone at the expense of Biblical truth.
Yep. Don't be so PC! But also don't be so cocksure you understand all of Biblical truth. One of the top Bible scholars in the world (N.T. Wright) estimates that about 25% of what he teaches his students is wrong... and of course, if he knew which 25%, he'd fix it.

7. Pastors preaching moralism instead of Christ-centered messages.
Agreed. That's an error.

8. Approving of homosexuality.
I do. I don't advocate it, but if you are, it's because God made you that way.

9. Approving of women elders.
I absolutely do! Women should be eligible for all positions in church leadership. Yes, even including the Pope, if you're Catholic.

10. Not condemning the sins of society.
Indeed. But don't just condemn the ones on your fundie-approved list. And don't be a scold. It gets old fast.

11. Psychology as an authority on human nature.
Authority, no. But very useful, yes.

12. Use of politically correct terms of the world from the pulpit where those terms replace Biblical values and truths
What does this mean? Calling gays sodomites? But that isn't even Biblically correct. Read what the prophets said were the sins of Sodom. Hint: they had a pretty long list, and they didn't mention homosexuality. The point is what? Just trying to be as offensive as possible and make them think Christians are insensitive jerks?

13, Hey, what happened to 13?
Superstitious much?

14. Going to church as a social habit.
Agreed. That misses the point. Being part of a community is part of why we go, but not the main purpose.

15. Prayer as a last resort.
It's good to pray when things are that bad. But don't wait 'til then! God would like to hear from you often, just like your mom would.

16. Missionaries not sent out or supported.
Agreed. Missionaries are good.

17. Divorce statistics as common as secular society.
Or even higher! I would guess partly the fault of teaching stupid patriarchal nonsense about marriage.

18. Evolution.
What? Wedded to literal 7-day Creation, are we? Rejection of science is one reason the church is in decline.

I agree with most of your responses.  For one thing, I'm not wedded to a literal 7-day creation, but I don't believe macro-evolution is anything more than an untested hypothesis.  Micro-evolution (antibiotic-resistant bacteria, bird beak lengths changing and becoming dominant depending on food availability) has been tested and observed.  But it's an astronomical leap of faith to say that, given enough time, it would lead to macro-evolution, and then treat that hypothesis as a theory or even as proved fact. 

 

[praise_yeshua]

1. Teaching that the Bible is not inspired and inerrant.
Inspired, yes. Inerrant only in the sense that the Bible is as God intended, for His good purposes, and He made sure that it is.

2. Using books instead of the Bible in Bible study.
Instead of the Bible, bad. Alongside the Bible, often helpful.

3. Teaching that there is more than one way to God besides Jesus.
Jesus is the only way. But He may save those whom He pleases, whether they've heard of Him or not, or declared as His followers or not. It's up to Him.

4. Being embarrassed to say that Jesus is the only way to salvation.
Nothing to be embarrassed about.

5. Teaching that there is no absolute right and wrong.
Of course there is. But not everything is. Some things are culturally relative, personal preference, or simply ambiguous.

6. Being careful to not offend anyone at the expense of Biblical truth.
Yep. Don't be so PC! But also don't be so cocksure you understand all of Biblical truth. One of the top Bible scholars in the world (N.T. Wright) estimates that about 25% of what he teaches his students is wrong... and of course, if he knew which 25%, he'd fix it.

7. Pastors preaching moralism instead of Christ-centered messages.
Agreed. That's an error.

8. Approving of homosexuality.
I do. I don't advocate it, but if you are, it's because God made you that way.

9. Approving of women elders.
I absolutely do! Women should be eligible for all positions in church leadership. Yes, even including the Pope, if you're Catholic.

10. Not condemning the sins of society.
Indeed. But don't just condemn the ones on your fundie-approved list. And don't be a scold. It gets old fast.

11. Psychology as an authority on human nature.
Authority, no. But very useful, yes.

12. Use of politically correct terms of the world from the pulpit where those terms replace Biblical values and truths
What does this mean? Calling gays sodomites? But that isn't even Biblically correct. Read what the prophets said were the sins of Sodom. Hint: they had a pretty long list, and they didn't mention homosexuality. The point is what? Just trying to be as offensive as possible and make them think Christians are insensitive jerks?

13, Hey, what happened to 13?
Superstitious much?

14. Going to church as a social habit.
Agreed. That misses the point. Being part of a community is part of why we go, but not the main purpose.

15. Prayer as a last resort.
It's good to pray when things are that bad. But don't wait 'til then! God would like to hear from you often, just like your mom would.

16. Missionaries not sent out or supported.
Agreed. Missionaries are good.

17. Divorce statistics as common as secular society.
Or even higher! I would guess partly the fault of teaching stupid patriarchal nonsense about marriage.

18. Evolution.
What? Wedded to literal 7-day Creation, are we? Rejection of science is one reason the church is in decline.

I agree with most of your responses.  For one thing, I'm not wedded to a literal 7-day creation, but I don't believe macro-evolution is anything more than an untested hypothesis.  Micro-evolution (adaptation) has been tested and observed.  But it's an astronomical leap of faith to say that, given enough time, it would lead to macro-evolution, and then treat that hypothesis as a theory or even as proved fact.

I don't see how science has removed the possibility of a literal 7 day creation.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

I don't see how science has removed the possibility of a literal 7 day creation.

I agree, I'm just not wedded to the idea.  It's not something you can prove or disprove. 

 

[FSSL]

It is something that has been proven in Genesis 1.

 

[Izdaari]

It is something that has been proven in Genesis 1.

That's one way to read Genesis 1. It's not the way I read it.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

It is something that has been proven in Genesis 1.

That's one way to read Genesis 1. It's not the way I read it.

I'm open to different views on what 7 days means in Genesis 1.  I just don't happen to believe that if it wasn't 7 literal 24-hour days, therefore evolution must be true.  That's a non-sequitur. 

Also, 7 literal vs. 7 metaphorical/poetic not really what the Bible is about.

 

[Izdaari]

I agree with most of your responses.  For one thing, I'm not wedded to a literal 7-day creation, but I don't believe macro-evolution is anything more than an untested hypothesis.  Micro-evolution (adaptation) has been tested and observed.  But it's an astronomical leap of faith to say that, given enough time, it would lead to macro-evolution, and then treat that hypothesis as a theory or even as proved fact.

I don't see how science has removed the possibility of a literal 7 day creation.

I'm not saying evolution is true. I think either theistic evolution or Old Earth Creation must be, because I do rule out both a-theistic evolution and literal 7-day Creation. I don't think science COULD disprove the latter -- God could make a young earth that appears old to every scientific test -- but I believe it would be out of character for God to lie by means by means of His creation, making it appear to be really old when it actually isn't. That's why I rule it out.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

I'm not saying evolution is true. I think either theistic evolution or Old Earth Creation must be, because I do rule out both a-theistic evolution and literal 7-day Creation. I don't science COULD disprove the latter, but I believe it would be out of character for God to lie by means by means of His creation, making it appear to be really old when it actually isn't. That's why I rule it out.

I rule out the idea of "God faked an old earth", too.  But I'm also not convinced by the scientific conclusion that the earth is X billion years old.

 

[FSSL]

That's one way to read Genesis 1. It's not the way I read it.

First Day, Second Day, Third Day, etc... The word "day," in the Hebrew, when it is introduced by the ordinals always refer to a typical, 24-hour day.

 

[Izdaari]

That's one way to read Genesis 1. It's not the way I read it.

First Day, Second Day, Third Day, etc... The word "day," in the Hebrew, when it is introduced by the ordinals always refer to a typical, 24-hour day.

And you believe that's historical narrative, instead of belonging to the creation myth genre? I think that's the core of our difference. Note that I'm using "myth" in the technical literary sense. It doesn't mean untrue. Cf. Lewis, Tolkien and MacDonald on "True Myth".

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Over the past 300 years, the scientific conclusion of the age of the earth has gone from roughly 6,000-10,000 years (based on population growth, I think) to 20 million years (Lord Kelvin) and lots of other estimates eventually reaching 4.6 billion years.  So the earth has aged roughly 4.6 billion years in a span of only 300 years of human science. 

I think the perfect scientific explanation is that earth suffers from Progeria, a rapid aging disorder.  I estimate that by the year 2,500, the earth will be 3.5 trillion years old. 

 

[FSSL]

And you believe that's historical narrative, instead of belonging to the creation myth genre? I think that's the core of our difference. Note that I'm using "myth" in the technical literary sense. It doesn't mean untrue. Cf. Lewis, Tolkien and MacDonald on "True Myth".

Whether a myth or historical narrative, words have meaning. In Genesis 1, "earth" means "earth," "animals" means "animals," so why must "first day" be anything other than a literal day (even if this was a myth)?

Note that Moses, the same writer of Genesis notes, once again, the days of Creation and uses the seventh day (Sabbath) in the context of a literal day.

"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. " (Ex 20:11).

You are free to show us any other example where "first day...." means anything other than a normal day. If you have an example from a myth, that will be fine.

 

[FSSL]

What are your thoughts of this list? Is your church becoming secular? Are you?

When your church has a rollin : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TS9grAkcZ3A&feature=youtu.be

 

[praise_yeshua]

I agree with most of your responses.  For one thing, I'm not wedded to a literal 7-day creation, but I don't believe macro-evolution is anything more than an untested hypothesis.  Micro-evolution (adaptation) has been tested and observed.  But it's an astronomical leap of faith to say that, given enough time, it would lead to macro-evolution, and then treat that hypothesis as a theory or even as proved fact.

I don't see how science has removed the possibility of a literal 7 day creation.

I'm not saying evolution is true. I think either theistic evolution or Old Earth Creation must be, because I do rule out both a-theistic evolution and literal 7-day Creation. I don't think science COULD disprove the latter -- God could make a young earth that appears old to every scientific test -- but I believe it would be out of character for God to lie by means by means of His creation, making it appear to be really old when it actually isn't. That's why I rule it out.

God never told us to use radiometric dating to establish truth. Radiometric dating is not infallible and we don't know all the variables that affect decay rate. Who knows. We have a small sample size. Its the variable that always gets us....

I just happen to believe that God has always been a Creator. Its not just something He stumbled upon on His old age to occupy His time. If God's always been a Creator..... then "creations" have been around a long time. It is very possible that God formed this world and our lives from what all ready existed. I don't buy this idea often sold as being "something from nothing". Maybe in the very beginning.... I just don't think Genesis 1 talks about the beginning of God.