12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
13 These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
If we are not careful or discerning, ideas and ideologies that are contrary to Scripture will infiltrate the the Church. And, one of the tools to accomplish that is the language that is used. The words we speak can indicate what's in our hearts, and if our words contradict Scripture, then we are insufficient in our representation of Christ.
Media feeds errant philosophies, and I am thankful for Christian media sources, which I use regularly, that are devoted, by and large, to speaking truth. But, there are outlets that wear a religious label that are promoting ideas that are contrary to Scriptures. Religion News Service comes to mind. The decline of Christianity Today has been documented throughout the years.
An astute writer for The Christian Post wrote an astonishing op-ed piece on that website recently that can serve as a warning to Christians about language that can impact the Church negatively. His name is Ian Giatti, who recently attended the annual convention of the Evangelical Press Association; he writes:
Created in 1948, the Evangelical Press Association is the world’s largest professional organization of Christian print and digital publications, from magazines and newspapers to newsletters and content-driven websites.It was a workshop called, “Communicating Words and Visuals with Inclusivity." There's one of those "red flag" words, because you will find people who promote inclusivity culture-wide as perhaps not-too-inclusive of Biblical Christianity. The workshop was led by the editor-in-chief of a magazine published by a high-profile ministry with which you're probably familiar.
Every year, the EPA holds its annual convention where journalists, photographers and other media creators gather to network, to learn, and, not unlike most other church gatherings, to feast.
It’s where publications are honored for their work in various media categories, not as the world honors, not like the Golden Globes or something glitzy, but as servants in the work of the Gospel, as co-laborers with Christ. As light and salt in an age of darkness and corruption.
Or so we tell ourselves.
Amid a dizzying barrage of workshops and meet-and-greets, there was one offering that, at least for me, raised questions as to exactly what was being accomplished at such a gathering, particularly where newbies and aspiring journalists pay good money to attend in the hopes of landing their next gig.
“Oftentimes, because we work in so many different cultures around the world, we work in a lot of places where Christianity is either not allowed or the Christian population is less than two percent,” she explained. “We are very sensitive to accusations of proselytization, and so, none of our work is conditional on people becoming Christians. None of our work is conditional, [like] ‘Come listen to a Sunday School lesson.
These are the words of the Editor-in-Chief of the magazine published by the organization World Vision, Kristy Glaspie. Giatti wrote:
There we were, at an Evangelical media workshop, Christian journalists being told not to evangelize others for fear of causing offense. That the words of the Gospel aren’t “inclusive” enough for the mission field.
And we wonder why the mission and the message of the Church is weak in America.
And we hand-wring over falling attendance numbers and apostasy.
And we scratch our heads when we’re told that Gen Z wants nothing to do with Evangelicalism.
We’re too busy telling our own not to use the words of Scripture and, yes, to proclaim salvation to the lost and the Savior to a dying world.
The spirit of faux "inclusion" at World Vision appeared 10 years ago, when, as The Christian Post reported at the time:
After days of backlash from Evangelicals, World Vision, an international nonprofit ministry, has reversed its decision to allow those in same-sex marriages to be employed.
"Today, the World Vision U.S. board publicly reversed its recent decision to change our national employment conduct policy," the Christian humanitarian organization said in a letter to supporters Wednesday. "The board acknowledged they made a mistake and chose to revert to our longstanding conduct policy requiring sexual abstinence for all single employees and faithfulness within the Biblical covenant of marriage between a man and a woman."
World Vision has come under heavy criticism since it made public on Monday its policy change. In a letter to its employees that was shared with The Christian Post on Monday, World Vision President Richard Stearns announced that while the organization is not endorsing same-sex marriage, it recognizes that its staff is comprised of believers from more than 50 denominations, some of which have sanctioned same-sex marriage. Thus, its board has decided to defer the issue to local churches, in its effort to "treat all of our employees equally."
Ironically enough, when you fast forward to a report on Ministry Watch just two weeks ago, you see a report that World Vision had "...agreed to pay $120,000 as part of a settlement to help move an employment dispute through the appeals process, according to a motion filed jointly with a candidate whose job offer was withdrawn in 2021." The article says:
In January 2021, World Vision hired Aubry McMahon to fill an open position as a customer service representative. Before officially starting, McMahon emailed the ministry inquiring about maternity leave, indicating that she and a woman she identified as her “wife” were expecting. World Vision then revoked the employment offer since McMahon was in a same-sex marriage and did not meet the ministry’s conduct criteria. She sued a few months later, claiming discrimination based on her gender, sexual orientation, and marital status.
A lower court judge had ruled against World Vision, which has appealed to the 9th Circuit federal appeals court.
No doubt, language can communicate approval or disapproval, endorsement or disdain. Consider those who would label those who embrace the sanctity of life as "anti-abortion" rather than "pro-life." Or those who would describe biological men who present as female as "transgender females."
It is a sin of the highest order to be a "nationalist" and that is extended to calling a Christian who loves his or her country a "Christian nationalist." "Inclusion" has become a term that grants favored status to certain people, but typically will be used to exclude people of faith for their perceived "intolerance." And, it goes on and on. And, all of this ends up where even the words of Scripture, the Word of God, are watered down or omitted because, well, "you don't want to offend somebody." We must be bold to embrace the language and meaning of Scripture so that we communicate clearly God's truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment