The Christian Chronicle (Part 1)

No, this is not an endorsement. Amongst the churches of Christ, many papers have come and gone. The Millennial Harbinger was published for four decades (1830-1870); The Firm Foundation lasted from 1884 to 2010. The Gospel Advocate began in 1855 but suspended publication in 1861 due to the Civil War. It resumed in 1866 and was known as the Old Reliable for more than 150 years. To say the least, many more magazine have published during this time period. The Preceptor is available in electronic form; it contains some excellent reading. Some worthwhile publications are still being published in print by brethren.

The Christian Chronicle is not one of them. Their purpose seems to be to highlight what mostly liberal churches of Christ are doing. The first article your congenial editor wrote concerning them appeared in Spiritual Perspectives (then published in Denton, Texas) on July 1, 2001. Below is a summary of that article, which we printed on July 17, 2016.

SO, WHAT IS THE CHRISTIAN CHRONICLE CHRONICLING?

So, what "leaders" does The Christian Chronicle interview for a sampling of their "wisdom"? Below are some of the names of those who were consulted:

Lynn Anderson announced nearly thirty years ago that the church of Christ is a BIG, SICK, DENOMINATION. [For emphasis’ sake, he added that he meant all three words—BIG and SICK and a DENOMINATION, GWS.] He has since written Navigating the Winds of Change and is regarded by all faithful brethren as a "change" agent. Dave Miller reviewed his book in the 1995 Spiritual Sword lectureship book, God's Amazing Grace (507-38). Yet Anderson was the man chosen to discuss "Leadership Renewal" (May) and "Empowering Leaders" (June).

Gregory Sterling is a Notre Dame professor and preaches for a congregation in Warsaw, Indiana, which other churches in that area do not fellowship—one that has appointed deaconesses. His topic was "Leadership in Churches of Christ" (May).

Don Browning was assigned "Diversity, Strength for the Church." He worked with the Singing Oaks Church of Christ here in Denton for a number of years. He is the one who got that congregation to host a drive-through "Easter" program (see "Why Pearl Street Does Not Fellowship Singing Oaks" in the April 9, 2000 Spiritual Perspectives). Browning can fellowship Leroy Garrett (who has been on the cutting edge of apostasy for more than four decades) and at least some religious denominations (June).

Some of the other "leaders" are associated with Abilene Christian University; most are with…liberal churches. The Chronicle even interviewed one who actually preaches the Truth, but why do they mostly select apostates? Are change agents the only ones we have to lead us? God forbid! Why was there no interview with…directors of sound schools of preaching? These men have a profound influence over those who will be working with congregations for decades to come. Of course, these schools are not producing change agents, advocating the appointment of deaconesses, or teaching their graduates how to host drive-through "Easter" services. Is it the flair for defying the Word of God that made these interviewees desirable to The Christian Chronicle?

1½ Decades Later

This paper was not mentioned again for fifteen years when Part 2 appeared in Spiritual Perspectives (published in Winter Park, Florida, since 2003). On July 17, 2016, we called attention to the contents of the July issue in an article titled, “So, What Is the Christian Chronicle Chronicling? (Part 2).” Below are our comments regarding the article, “Restoration Debate Requires Loving, Kingdom answers to Questions of Gender Identity.” After pointing out that the title alone is enough to turn the reader’s stomach, your congenial editor presented the following analysis.

The “kingdom” answer is for each individual to accept the way God made him. Only those born hermaphrodites have a legitimate problem. One knows that the ride is going to be bumpy when he reads that the kingdom perspective is, “Everyone sins.” Of course the statement is true, but it is irrelevant. No one is allowed to entertain sin or practice sin. Jesus called sin sin, but we are living in an age where some try to excuse everyone instead of holding them accountable.

Adultery, for example, is sin. Should an adulterer be forgiven? Yes, but not if he continues to practice it. Jesus told the woman taken in adultery to go and sin no more. He did not tell her, “Aw, shucks, we all sin.” And while we should not “mock, belittle, or marginalize another human because of their sin or temptation,” neither are we to support them in their error.

Should no group should receive “worse sinners” status? Really? Does that hold true for child molesters and mass murderers? Why does the author of this article think that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed—because the inhabitants cheated at cards? Did God Himself not assign them “worse sinners” status? While all sin (including private sins) is an affront to God, how can we fail to see that the results of some sins are far worse than others? Homosexuality abounded in the cities of the plain because it was left unchecked.

When Herod killed all the children two years old and under, he committed an atrocious act. Most people would say that it is worse than coveting an extra piece of pie or cake. Will God destroy a nation for allowing 60 million abortions— which approves of Planned Parenthood selling body parts of infants? Perhaps we should be blasé and conclude that everyone sins and there is no group that has “worse sinners” status.

The statements become more outrageous as the article continues. “Identity confusion is common.” Says who? If it is (which seems unlikely based on the past experience of most of us), it has only recently become so and probably due to those who are intentionally trying to confuse others. Who has heard anyone wonder if he should be male or female on a given day?

The writer goes on to say that we all “fall prey to the lies of the enemy that convince us we are not enough, that we need to be something more or different than we are.” The Bible says that Eve fell for Satan’s lie that God was keeping something from mankind—something we deserved to have, but nothing indicates she was experiencing feelings of inadequacy. The devil did not attempt to get her to change genders. We do not hear her muttering, “I want to be more like Adam.”

The writer then ties gender ”confusion” to God not knowing what He is doing and a legitimate principle of the need of self-improvement. He says: “How God made me is not sufficient, and I need to change myself so I will be better than I am.” Then he cites eating the forbidden fruit as an example. This analogy fails because the first couple was not trying to better themselves; they were trying to have more than what God desired for them. There’s a reason the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes are termed covetousness. The desire is for something that one should not have or for what is not even available. Certainly, we should improve on the skills that God has given us, but Satan promises what is not even realistic.

What Reflects Jesus?

The author rightly observes that the way we treat someone personally is not the same way we deal with issues publicly. But he way oversteps the truth when he avers: “Judgement [sic], condemnation, harshness and disgust do not reflect Jesus.” Has he never read Matthew 23 and all of the times Jesus said, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites”? His personal conversation with Nicodemus was totally different.

But Jesus never said, “Don’t judge, period.” Rather He said, “Judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). Who condemned sin more than Jesus did? “And this is the condemnation, that light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil” (John 3:19). As for harshness, some would say that Matthew 7:13-14 is way too harsh. Concerning the word disgust, perhaps the author should read Leviticus 20:13: “If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.” The word abomination means “an abhorrence for someone or something.” Could that imply disgust?

The public has been talked into thinking that homosexuality is just an alternative “lifestyle.” No, it still disgusts God; it remains an abomination. Now those claiming to be Christians are (apparently) falling for the propaganda of the homosexual agenda. We do not hate individuals, but the practice is still sinful. The writer is correct in saying that the issue is not about restrooms; it is not—it is about advancing the homosexual agenda.

Many misapply compassion. It should not be granted to those who have no intention of changing. Jesus was willing to grant forgiveness to Zacchaeus for his genuine repentance of stealing from others and his willingness to restore fourfold. Did he not have compassion on others? Yes, but He expressed it in the form of warning. He told Judas it would be better that he had not been born (Matt. 26:24). To tell people steeped in sin, “Unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3) is the demonstration of compassion. To say that we are all sinners helps them not at all.

The writer of this unfortunate article claims that “this issue is not new, and it involves people in the pews of more churches than most might think.” Preposterous! Of all the problems that brethren and churches have had in the past 50 years, this notion has not once surfaced—until now. “Historically, Christians struggling with gender dysphoria did so in silence due to fear.” Where is the evidence for all this confusion?

The writer says we need to view gender identity problems from a “kingdom perspective.” Okay. Here it is. If you want to be valuable in the kingdom, quit being self-absorbed…thinking your problem is the greatest in the universe and that God made a mistake in assigning your gender. You are what you are; now make the best use of it to mature spiritually and teach others.