Revoice strikes again.....again?

Status
Not open for further replies.
This doesn't have the full page, which no longer exists on their home page, but does prove that this PCA church did have the leadership of Revoice at their Lords Day service.
 
Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Tell us what this means. Please elaborate and give some direction to the thread.
 
I didn't provide context because my original post did. I assumed that everyone on PB would find inviting the Revoice leaders to speak at your church for any reason other than to publicly repent a bad thing. Much less to teach. I had to provide a link from a PCA source due to my last post being moderated (shut down) for providing a Pulpit and Pen article as a source.
 
Last edited:
http://www.graceseattle.org/uploads/documents/orders-of-worship/20190120-OW.pdf
Numbered page 14, PDF page 17.

All of the weekend activities are set out. Collins speaking in the worship services, the giving over to the Sunday School hour for a panel discussion, and the private meetings for homosexuals (or their spouses or family members) to be held at an undisclosed location.

I looked at this link and they have some Reflection Quotes. One of them is this:

[John, the disciple of Jesus] regards his call as a disciple not as a call to service, but an entitlement of privilege and exclusion. James Edwards, The Gospel According to Luke

I know I am not as smart and theologically trained as most people here, but, doesn't that quote say accusing slander towards the apostle John? Blasphemy towards the scripture he wrote? Do I need to reflect all day so I can figure out John had a bad attitude?
 
I looked at this link and they have some Reflection Quotes. One of them is this:

[John, the disciple of Jesus] regards his call as a disciple not as a call to service, but an entitlement of privilege and exclusion. James Edwards, The Gospel According to Luke

I know I am not as smart and theologically trained as most people here, but, doesn't that quote say accusing slander towards the apostle John? Blasphemy towards the scripture he wrote? Do I need to reflect all day so I can figure out John had a bad attitude?

We probably ought to have more context before picking apart that quote. But there are places in Luke where John certainly had a bad attitude (as did the other disciples, at times).
 
We probably ought to have more context before picking apart that quote. But there are places in Luke where John certainly had a bad attitude (as did the other disciples, at times).

Jack, you are technically correct. Fair enough. Thank you.

But when a church wants to reach out to the unchurched, and a service is geared to those caught up in ungodly sexual addictions, many of whom if not almost all were probably seriously traumatized as children- beaten, sodomized, molested- and who according to statistics are prone to suicide (ie the trannies) .....this is how you want to introduce John? The glorious gospel of John, which ought to bring such hope and comfort? People coming in may know very little about the bible, and oh, by the way, this guy John had an attitude of privilege and exclusion? Wouldn't you at least want to add a sentence- but he was changed by the power of the Holy Spirit and his heart became transformed, to live a selfless life of service? If the quote is out of context, wouldn't you want the proper context for those who are new?

Maybe I should not even look at this stuff, I just get really cynical. Not a church I'd want to visit.....
 
We probably ought to have more context before picking apart that quote. But there are places in Luke where John certainly had a bad attitude (as did the other disciples, at times).

What sort of context would put that dogs breakfast into a good light?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I looked at this link and they have some Reflection Quotes. One of them is this:

[John, the disciple of Jesus] regards his call as a disciple not as a call to service, but an entitlement of privilege and exclusion. James Edwards, The Gospel According to Luke

I know I am not as smart and theologically trained as most people here, but, doesn't that quote say accusing slander towards the apostle John? Blasphemy towards the scripture he wrote? Do I need to reflect all day so I can figure out John had a bad attitude?

The remark is made as part of the comments on Luke 9:46-50. There John reported how he prohibited someone from outside their group from casting out demons in Jesus' name. It's a natural text to use for considering who counts as a follower of Christ. I say that, not to defend the conference or what might be done there, but simply to press for accuracy in the criticisms of it.
 
What sort of context would put that dogs breakfast into a good light?

I have taught that in Luke 9:46 the disciples were buying in to wrongheaded cultural ideas about greatness, and that a few verses later in Luke 9:54, James and John were probably not speaking merely out of anger, but harbored cultural hatred for Samaritans and failed again to understand what it meant to be a disciple of Jesus. In both instances, they should have been more aware of their own sin and slower to feel judgmentally superior. And with the Samaritans they should have been eager to see the village repent rather than eager to see God take the side of Jesus & Company by sending fire from heaven. We don't know what Jesus' rebuke of James and John said in the second instance, but something along those lines is not hard to fathom.

The quote posted above looks like it could be saying much the same thing, albeit using progressive-sounding terminology that might make us suspicious. This is why I would want to see more context before condemning it. The fact that it appears to support a trend I have questions about in the first place only makes me want to be extra careful to make sure any criticism I lob in its direction is well-researched. Criticism is rightly ignored, and does not bring honor to Christ, when the critic hasn't done his homework. And even if we manage to rightly identify a certain speaker as somehow a bad guy (and I know nothing about the guy behind this quote), it doesn't mean we may rightly condemn anything and everything he says.
 
If the Seattle Church intends to make a comparison with a disciple's wrong ("cultural hatred") attitude towards Samaritans, then they are not biblical. By that I mean agreeing with the current dogma of the progressives that sexual orientation is inborn and unchangeable and is exactly the same as skin color and ethnic background.

If that were true, then we would no more look for a sodomite to change their affections than we would look for skin color to change, or heritage to change. We would not hold out hope for a tranny to reverse their longings than for a Samaritan to suddenly become one of the tribes of Israel. Its all in the genes at birth, and not in the fallen heart and mind. So, real bad exegesis there, if that is the intention.

I'll see if my phone call gets returned, LOL. And I'll ask about this too.
 
This doesn't have the full page, which no longer exists on their home page, but does prove that this PCA church did have the leadership of Revoice at their Lords Day service.
Is that is the group within the PCA that desires to have Christians repent of how we have "mistreated" gays, lesbians, and transgendered, and to be better treating them, more accepting of the preferences on this issue?
 
Last edited:
Is that is the group within the PCA that desires to have Christians repent of now we heave "mistreated" gays, lesbians, and transgendered, and to be better treating them, more accepting of the preferences on this issue?
Yes, Revoice is the group in the PCA made up of several graduates of Covenant Seminary that wants the church to find a place for LGBTQ+, to help them flourish as Christians and to help this group bring their "gay treasure" into heaven as well as to redeem the gay culture.
 
Yes, Revoice is the group in the PCA made up of several graduates of Covenant Seminary that wants the church to find a place for LGBTQ+, to help them flourish as Christians and to help this group bring their "gay treasure" into heaven as well as to redeem the gay culture.
They are asking the Church to accept what God has already defined as being abominations in His sight though. I fear that they are not asking us to just treat them with love of Christ, but to actually support and agree with their chosen lifestyles.
 
Yes, Revoice is the group in the PCA made up of several graduates of Covenant Seminary that wants the church to find a place for LGBTQ+, to help them flourish as Christians and to help this group bring their "gay treasure" into heaven as well as to redeem the gay culture.


Several graduates of other institutions as well. I don't agree with Revoice, or the philosophy that undergirded the conference, but Revoice is not a group of CTS alumni who desire to make the PCA LGBTQ+ inclusive. That's bearing false witness.

Also, part of the problem with revoice is that the speakers were not in agreement with one another. It's unfair to say that every speaker was for bringing about "gay treasure" and redeeming queer culture.

Again, I am not for Revoice. But if conservatives are going to respond to these issues appropriately, we must do truthfully, critically and appropriately.
 
Several graduates of other institutions as well. I don't agree with Revoice, or the philosophy that undergirded the conference, but Revoice is not a group of CTS alumni who desire to make the PCA LGBTQ+ inclusive. That's bearing false witness.

Also, part of the problem with revoice is that the speakers were not in agreement with one another. It's unfair to say that every speaker was for bringing about "gay treasure" and redeeming queer culture.

Again, I am not for Revoice. But if conservatives are going to respond to these issues appropriately, we must do truthfully, critically and appropriately.

Perhaps you could tell us what they are doing?
 
Several graduates of other institutions as well. I don't agree with Revoice, or the philosophy that undergirded the conference, but Revoice is not a group of CTS alumni who desire to make the PCA LGBTQ+ inclusive. That's bearing false witness.

Also, part of the problem with revoice is that the speakers were not in agreement with one another. It's unfair to say that every speaker was for bringing about "gay treasure" and redeeming queer culture.

Again, I am not for Revoice. But if conservatives are going to respond to these issues appropriately, we must do truthfully, critically and appropriately.
Silas22,
I did not say that Revoice was a group that desire to make the PCA LGBTQ+ inclusive. And for you to twist my words is to bear false witness. That is if you did so intentionally. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I said that they desire to make the Church LGBTQ+ inclusive. (I should have capitalized church) Which is a much more serious offence. Also, I did not say that everyone at the Revoice conference agreed on queer culture and gay treasure. I was speaking generally as we are forced to do with this movement as well as the woke/social justice movement that this spawns from. Because they are so vague and ambiguous it makes it extremely difficult to pin them down or to break them down into sub-groups. But I am pretty sure that is part of their strategy.
 
Give Presbyterianism more time to work. I hope it never happens, but after all if this were a Baptist church, how on earth could it be dealt with other than internet articles, blogs, and parachurch conferences ( the courts of public opinion With no ecclesiastical authority)? Please, if you have not already, consider bringing these issues to your local PCA sessions and encourage them to consider some form of action. Pray for the two presbyteries involved with Revoice and that they would accept brotherly rebuke and be willing to repent. Pray for those elders who see Revoice for what it really is, an unbiblical and anti-confessional response to man’s sinfulness. Pray that those Elders and courts would be willing to take some form of biblical corrective action.

The PCA has some issues to conquer, but they are not Congregationalist! An understanding of faithful Presbyterianism will better equip one to weigh in......:2cents::detective:
 
Last edited:
Give Presbyterianism more time to work. I hope it never happens, but after all if this were a Baptist church, how on earth could it be dealt with other than internet articles, blogs, and parachurch conferences ( the courts of public opinion With no ecclesiastical authority)? Please, if you have not already, consider bringing these issues to your local PCA sessions and encourage them to consider some form of action. Pray for the two presbyteries involved with Revoice and that they would accept brotherly rebuke and be willing to repent. Pray for those elders who see Revoice for what it really is, an unbiblical and anti-confessional response to man’s sinfulness. Pray that those Elders and courts would be willing to take some form of biblical corrective action.

The PCA has some issues to conquer, but they are not Congregationalist! An understanding of faithful Presbyterianism will better equip one to weigh in......:2cents::detective:
If a Baptist church, like mine is, was associated with a fellowship or a Denomination of fellow Baptist churches, we would appeal this to the district Board of Elders.
 
Give Presbyterianism more time to work. I hope it never happens, but after all if this were a Baptist church, how on earth could it be dealt with other than internet articles, blogs, and parachurch conferences ( the courts of public opinion With no ecclesiastical authority)? Please, if you have not already, consider bringing these issues to your local PCA sessions and encourage them to consider some form of action. Pray for the two presbyteries involved with Revoice and that they would accept brotherly rebuke and be willing to repent. Pray for those elders who see Revoice for what it really is, an unbiblical and anti-confessional response to man’s sinfulness. Pray that those Elders and courts would be willing to take some form of biblical corrective action.

The PCA has some issues to conquer, but they are not Congregationalist! An understanding of faithful Presbyterianism will better equip one to weigh in......:2cents::detective:
Grant,

I hear what you are saying. But isn't a year a pretty long time to deal with this? I am praying for these groups. It hits home for me in a major way. I know you see SBC in my signature but I attend a PCA and have been for over a year. We have been prayerfully considering joining this PCA church for a while now. But these things are truly concerning.

You see my son was struggling with homosexual temptations and was fighting what I thought was a pretty good fight. Well his class mates who attended our former churches youth group encouraged him to be himself and his youth pastor encouraged him and the other youth to read books by LGBTQ+/woke writers and within a year and a half of giving up his fight my son was HIV positive.

Does faithful Presbyterianism mean a one year thoughtful response to a 6 month terminal cancer when peoples eternal souls are at stake? It seems dangerous and unbiblical.
 
Grant,

I hear what you are saying. But isn't a year a pretty long time to deal with this? I am praying for these groups. It hits home for me in a major way. I know you see SBC in my signature but I attend a PCA and have been for over a year. We have been prayerfully considering joining this PCA church for a while now. But these things are truly concerning.

You see my son was struggling with homosexual temptations and was fighting what I thought was a pretty good fight. Well his class mates who attended our former churches youth group encouraged him to be himself and his youth pastor encouraged him and the other youth to read books by LGBTQ+/woke writers and within a year and a half of giving up his fight my son was HIV positive.

Does faithful Presbyterianism mean a one year thoughtful response to a 6 month terminal cancer when peoples eternal souls are at stake? It seems dangerous and unbiblical.
Santos,

I do not like delayed responses either. Trust me when I say, the former baptist in me wants to go into "Hulk Smash" mode when I see these things. The Elders who have allowed this to happen to the sheep will be held accountable for the way they Shepard the sheep.

Further, it sounds like you have a unique experience to bring to the table that could serve to help, encourage, and defend against the very things Revoice is trying to sneak in. The PCA has not decided to "take a year to deal with this". Trust me when I say that PCA elders, sessions, presbyteries, and layman have and are working diligently at addressing this Revoice issue in a biblical, patient, and loving manner. Just because all those efforts and details are not publicized on internet forums, blogs, and podcasts does not mean "NOTHING" is being done. Revoice may seem like a very obvious error to many here on PB, but when you really dive into the details of "how can we fix this", it is going to take a very meticulous, patient, wise, discerning, and steady hand to pull this sin out by the roots.

Anytime rebuke is needed, it should be done not only with a desire/strategy to correct, but also to correct with a goal of full restoration (if possible). This can be difficult. Anyways, I hope this helps. Is Revoice a reason to be mad, disheartened, and embarrassed for the PCA...........YES!, but has Revoice become such an issue that we need to abandon the entire denomination.......NO! Trust Presbyterianism and hopefully we will find out at GA 2019 just how much solid work and effort has been done to purge this from the PCA. At least that is my hope. My fear is that many conservatives in the PCA are ignorant of what is going on or will simply not think it worthy of their time and energy since it is not in their neck of the woods. The time is now for all conservative Elders to gather their plums and take/encourage biblical corrective action.

P.S. I hope this Revoice mess will serve to awaken many in the PCA as the Ents awoke upon learning of how many of their brothers had been destroyed at the hand of Saruman! "Release the RIVER!":detective:
 
The time is now for all conservative Elders to gather their plums and take/encourage biblical corrective action.

P.S. I hope this Revoice mess will serve to awaken many in the PCA as the Ents awoke upon learning of how many of their brothers had been destroyed at the hand of Saruman! "Release the RIVER!":detective:

I'm new to the denomination, so I am not privy to much, but I believe this conference has wakened a sleeping giant.
 
P.S. I hope this Revoice mess will serve to awaken many in the PCA as the Ents awoke upon learning of how many of their brothers had been destroyed at the hand of Saruman! "Release the RIVER

With that, you now have your Lord of the Rings/Narnia knowledge requirement of ordination complete. ;)
 
Grant,

I hear what you are saying. But isn't a year a pretty long time to deal with this? I am praying for these groups. It hits home for me in a major way. I know you see SBC in my signature but I attend a PCA and have been for over a year. We have been prayerfully considering joining this PCA church for a while now. But these things are truly concerning.

You see my son was struggling with homosexual temptations and was fighting what I thought was a pretty good fight. Well his class mates who attended our former churches youth group encouraged him to be himself and his youth pastor encouraged him and the other youth to read books by LGBTQ+/woke writers and within a year and a half of giving up his fight my son was HIV positive.

Does faithful Presbyterianism mean a one year thoughtful response to a 6 month terminal cancer when peoples eternal souls are at stake? It seems dangerous and unbiblical.

I'm terribly sorry about your boy. I pray that God uses this to draw him to Himself.
 
The PCA has some issues to conquer, but they are not Congregationalist! An understanding of faithful Presbyterianism will better equip one to weigh in......:2cents::detective:

This is a perfect illustration of the advantages and disadvantages of both systems of church government. The advantage of Presbyterianism is that there are means to discipline and deal with such issues at the denominational level. The disadvantage is that, should these fail, the individual churches have no further recourse except to leave the denomination, which can be costly and problematic.

The disadvantage of congregational government is that, as you pointed out, there are no real means of dealing with this at the denominational level. The advantage is that, should something like this take hold in the SBC for example, an individual church could fully disassociate by the end of the business day with no practical impact whatsoever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top