Category Archives: Church

Dr. Mohler By Faith Alone

Posted on by jbyas

This week Dr. Al Mohler, the President of a Southern Baptist Seminary, reminds us that the Roman Catholic Church is a false church that teaches a false gospel.

His reason?

“First and foremost, evangelicals must affirm that the doctrine of justification by faith alone is an essential, because that is the very definition of the gospel itself, and there is nothing more core, central and essential than the gospel. The reformers were absolutely right in saying that any understanding of justification – even the understanding that justification is by faith and something else — is another gospel, is anathema to the gospel of Jesus Christ,” Mohler said. “The only way of understanding salvation by grace alone through faith alone is defining justification as the Scripture defines it, and that is justification by faith alone.”

Please tell me if I’m missing something here (I mean that sincerely) but the logic seems to be this:

The core of the gospel is justification by faith alone.
If you don’t believe that then you are believing a “false gospel.”

Is that what he’s saying? If so, I have a question about this logic. Isn’t the insistence that I must believe in the doctrine of “justification by faith alone” to be a faithful Christian a contradiction?

It sounds to me like Mohler is doing the exact thing he is accusing Catholics of doing. Isn’t he basically saying that “Justification is by faith alone AND your belief that justification is by faith alone”? In that case, neither the Catholics nor Mohler are saying that justification is by faith alone.

So, to sum up:

If the Catholic Church says the core of the gospel is faith + works, it’s heresy.

If Mohler says the core of the gospel is faith + correct beliefs about faith, it’s orthodoxy.

Got it.

We Should Be Against the Freedom of Religion

Posted on by jbyas

I have thought about this for a while, and this seems to be the conclusion we must come to if we are a Christian who is opposed to gay marriage: “We should be against the Freedom of Religion.”

When I ask Christians why they are against gay marriage, the reason most often cited is “because I believe it’s sinful. Why would I advocate for something I find wrong?”

This logic seems to be based on this principle:

“As a Christian, it is wrong to advocate for the government to allow for something I find sinful.”

Okay, so let’s take that principle and apply it to the freedom of religion.

Isn’t that advocating for the government to allow other people to worship other gods?

And isn’t that practice also sinful, what the Bible calls idolatry?

In fact, while homosexuality is a topic that comes up in the Bible a handful of times, idolatry is mentioned thousands of times, univocally pronouncing the worship of other gods a sin, a great wrongdoing to the one true God.

So, if your reason for being against gay marriage is that you do not want to government to allow others to practice something you find sinful, then it stands to reason that you should also be against the freedom of religion in our country.

If you are unwilling to follow your own logic then we might rightly call that mental inconsistency at best, hypocrisy at worst, but in any case, do not expect me to be convinced by it.

 

3 Things Pastors Say But Don’t Mean

Posted on by jbyas

If you know me, you know I love irony. Why? For the most part, because irony reveals a place of disconnect. If you find irony, you have found a place where, though we don’t realize it (which is what makes it ironic), our words don’t match our actions. That is, we aren’t being consistent. Who we say we are, and who we really are, just isn’t adding up.

If I realize the disconnect but do it anyway, I am guilty of hypocrisy. But if I do not realize the disconnect, I am a victim of irony.

And I think church leadership says some things that are pretty ironic. Their actions reveal that they don’t actually believe what they are saying. And what makes it ironic is that I’m not sure they even realize it.

Here is my list of the top three:

Ironic Saying #1: “Every Member is a Minister.”

How you know they don’t mean it: They get paid & you don’t.

When we begin to actually live out “every member is a minister” we quickly realize that many pastors only want us to exercise our “minister”-ness in areas they are both comfortable with and in areas that do not threaten their authority or position.

Because, if every member really was a minister, then why are we paying them so much money to do something we are all supposed to be doing? To protect their roles (and paychecks) there is created a “first among equals” mentality, which can be very confusing for people who are told that “every member is a minister.” In what ways? And why don’t we get paid for it but you do?

So, if pastors actually acted on what they said, their own positions might be in question.

Ironic Saying #2: “Worship happens 7 days a week.”

How you know they don’t mean it: They aren’t okay with you not coming to their building on Sundays.

When we begin to actually live out “worship is every day,” and thus skip church on Sundays because we are getting it Monday-Saturday, we are told “Well, that’s not what we meant.” But then we are left with vacuous statements that “don’t really” mean anything. Again, we end up with a “first among equals” situation, which is very confusing. If Monday is just as important as Sunday, why do I get judged for not coming on Sunday but no one holds me accountable for what I do on Monday?

At least for me, I took “worship happens 7 days a week” very seriously. So then I wondered what made showing up to a building once a week unique.

Ironic Saying #3: “We welcome everyone.”

How you know they don’t mean it: They have statements of belief & requirements for membership.

We’ve already talked about this but here is a recap. When we say “everyone is welcome” we mean “you can come in the door just as you are,” but the expectation will always be that you soon adopt our particular set of beliefs. Why? Well, since the Church is defined by its beliefs, every person who doesn’t adhere to our beliefs dilutes our identity. So, for the health of the whole, you need to be absorbed as quickly as possible (through being taught or rebuked) or you risk being asked to leave altogether.

What’s my point in discussing these three sayings? There are two points.

First, as usual, I’m not saying these phrases are wrong. Nor am I saying these behaviors are wrong. I’m simply pointing out an inconsistency between the two. And far too often I’ve seen these inconsistencies lead to a lack of communication between a pastor and a person in the congregation, which leads to many people getting hurt by church leadership.

It’s not because pastors are evil. And it’s not because those people are sinful. Perhaps it’s because we aren’t being honest about what we believe and living those beliefs out in a consistent way, often because we don’t want to admit to ourselves the implications of our beliefs, whichever way they fall. Let’s work on that.

Second, we have to work on better communication. Yes, a lot of pastors aren’t aware of these inconsistencies. But many are. They have recognized them but have spent years justifying them. For instance, they know exactly why “ever member is a minister” but why they alone should they get a paycheck. They have found Bible verses to support their position and a stockpile of Bible experts to back them up.

Maybe they have good reasons. Or maybe they make up reasons because they need there to be a reason, to keep their jobs and to support their families. But either way, communicate those reasons to your congregation! They deserve to know why what you are saying seems incompatible with your behavior.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
-Upton Sinclair

The Gay Checklist for the Church*

Posted on by jbyas

There are many churches who are currently wrestling with what to do about the growing number of LGBTQ in their community. Some of these churches believe that being gay is a choice. Others say it’s not. Some of them believe that being gay is a sin. Other say it’s not. But in my tradition almost all of them agree that gay sex, even within a long-term monogamous relationship**, is sinful.

Okay. Let’s suppose it is. What should our churches do about the gays in their midst?

Inspired by the ethic of Jesus, who asks us to work on the plank in our own eye before trying to remove the gay speck in that gay dude’s eye, I have created a basic checklist for when it seems legitimate to single out a gay person in your church and tell them they have to repent or leave, thereby making them feel like they don’t belong or are a second-class citizen in your church:

As a church, we have asked every unmarried couple in our congregation if they are having sex. If so, we must ask them to stop. If they refuse, we must subject them to “church discipline” that leads to either repentance or excommunication or they leave on their own as a result of our passive-aggressive behavior toward them as we question whether or not they are even Christian.

As a church, we have looked over every person’s checkbook to see if they are greedy and/or lovers of money. If so, we must ask them to agree to a plan to be more generous. If they refuse, we must subject them to “church discipline” that leads to either repentance or excommunication or they leave on their own as a result of our passive-aggressive behavior toward them as we question whether or not they are even Christian..

As a church, we have looked at every male’s computer to see if they have watched porn in the past month. If they have, we must ask them to agree to accountability and a password protected internet. And give their mothers & wives the password. If they refuse, we must “love the sinner but hate the sin,” that is, subject them to “church discipline” that leads to either repentance or excommunication or they leave on their own as a result of our passive-aggressive behavior toward them as we question whether or not they are even Christian..

As a church, we have looked at every member of the congregation’s schedule to determine what idols are in their lives, the things that are more important than God. If they have even one, we must stone them (sorry, Old Testament) remind them that they “will not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9-10). If they refuse to repent, we must subject them to “church discipline” that leads to either repentance or excommunication or they leave on their own as a result of our passive-aggressive behavior toward them as we question whether or not they are even Christian..

As a church, we have looked into our own hearts to see if we are being judgmental and hypocritical, discriminating against sins that are “obvious” and/or do not affect us (the speck) while not taking seriously the sins that do (the plank).

If we say every sin is the same, perhaps our churches should start acting like it in the way they treat people.

*This is a revision of a previous post
**Or as we heteros call this type of relationship, “marriage.”

Why Certain People Don’t Belong in Church

Posted on by jbyas

As Christians, and more particularly, as Evangelicals, we want to provide a place where all people belong no matter what.

What we have to realize is that this is a promise/marketing message most Evangelical congregations can’t deliver because it contradicts its very identity.  And once again, we unwittingly participate in hypocrisy, or what Brene Brown calls the Disengagement Gap.

When a group bases its identity on a common set of beliefs, the group itself is threatened by anyone that does not hold that common set of beliefs. By definition. If we are defined by our beliefs, then the more people we have in our midst who do not hold to those beliefs, the more our identity is diluted and unclear.

Our desire to be a place where “everyone is welcome” might be enough to let someone in the door without having that set of beliefs but the expectation will always be that you soon adopt those beliefs. After all if the majority of people were like “you,” that is didn’t hold to these core beliefs about God, salvation, the Bible, etc, then in what sense are we even a church?

As such, there is always the chance that if you no longer share those beliefs, or take too long in “confessing” you hold to those beliefs, you are either restricted to a “lesser” form of “belonging” (for instance, not getting to be a member, forever stuck in “attender” status) or you risk being asked to leave altogether, for the health of the whole.

My point is that this isn’t the fault of the congregation for not being “accepting enough” or “loving the outsider enough.” If we did what we promised, based on how most congregations think of “Church,” then the very essence of that church would be compromised.

And if that is true, then congregations are doomed to this hypocrisy unless they (1) change their marketing, (2) change their views on the church, or (3) admit this inconsistency but do it for the sake of the movement. I am not sure I see another way (perhaps someone can help me). My point at this point is not to say that one of these options is more “right” than the other, only that when we don’t choose, we can’t be surprised when the culture finds Christians hypocritical.

If you want to see this in action, talk to someone who has accidentally questioned one of the assumed-but-often-unspoken beliefs in a church, things like:

1. The Bible is inerrant.
2. Gay sex is the worst sin
3. You should give a tithe (10% of your income)
4. The leadership of this church is God-ordained & therefore cannot be questioned

Of course, if you have ever accidentally questioned one of these things, you know what I’m talking about. You might be allowed to stray from these beliefs for a little while, but it puts strain on everyone around you, leading to awkward small groups, uncomfortable conversations with your pastor who found out about your disbelief through your small group leader, absolutely condescending “I’ll pray for you’s” from a family member. Why? Because in your very questions you are threatening the identity of the group. And the strain on the group can only be sustained for so long before it must be removed, either by requiring repentance or removal.

I am, ironically, often criticized for being too critical, for tearing down without building up. So I will vaguely show my hand to conclude: Perhaps Christians need to stop finding so much of their identity in mentally-checked-off beliefs rather than the person of Jesus.

Sure, to identify core beliefs other than the centrality of Christ in life & practice creates movement, alignment, focus, and growth. But it excludes, oppresses, and marginalizes the seekers among us, narrows the mission of God in the world, and creates idols out of doctrine. May we stop trying to control the family of God and allow Christ to do his work of grace in all of us, especially those who already belong.

Are We The Adoption Agency For God’s Family?

Posted on by jbyas

In most Evangelical churches, there are no requirements to be baptized, only a verbal commitment to Jesus, his saving grace and your desire to become like him. In fact, if a prostitute or drug addict wants to get baptized, the congregation will likely cheer, applaud, and tell the story for weeks about how big God’s grace is and how God always accepts us where we are.

In most Evangelical churches, there are several requirements to be a member of that particular church. There is typically an application that spells out the expectations for you to give financially (ideally the 10% “tithe”), for you to have “no known sin in your life,” to participate in the weekly worship service, to participate in a “Small Group,” and perhaps a few others. And if a prostitute or drug addict wants to be a member, the leadership will likely be uneasy and ask them to submit to some form of accountability. And there will likely not be stories about how big God’s grace is and how God always accepts us where we are, only stories about how important it is to the vision of the church that everyone that is a member is aligned.

So the same question keeps haunting me: Why is it okay for a prostitute to get baptized into God’s family as a declaration of faith, but for them to join our specific household they have to promise to clean up their act and give us money? Why is it okay for anyone to get baptized but only those who meet certain qualifications can be members?

We don’t scrutinize anyone when we go out to “evangelize” and we wear a badge of honor when someone “gives their life to Christ” even though we know nothing about them. But when they want to be members of our church, we ask questions like they are asking to marry our daughter.

Isn’t that essentially saying “Sure, anyone can get into God’s family but around here we have higher standards.” Who do we think we are?

When I asked these questions in the context of a leadership meeting once, the response was that membership was the “filter” we use for those who qualified for church leadership and that we needed to be strict about members since they represented our specific church. I said that made sense as an organization but why not create a different category of membership for those who wanted to be in church leadership? What I got was a blank stare and crickets chirping in the background.

This entire system of membership adds requirements for people, something I see Jesus explicitly condemning the Pharisees for. They too “added weights” to people and in Luke 11 46 Jesus replied, “And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them.”

In my former days, I thought my job was to keep the faith “pure” and make sure we didn’t let “in” those who would just give Jesus a bad name by their behavior. But I think this is exactly what Jesus was so vehemently against. The message of Jesus seems to be “All are welcome in the family. When you follow me, you are the promoter, not the bodyguard.”

Woe to us if we continue to make barriers for people to experience the life-giving relationship found with Jesus and the rest of his family.

From “The” to “My”

Posted on by jbyas

Just like every kid growing up in the 90s, I was taught by my parents, church, and school, that I could change the world when I grew up. And so when I grew up and became a pastor, I tried my hardest. And I thought that “changing the world” was what the gospel was about.

But the more I tried to change the world, the more my world suffered. The more my mind and heart were focused on the problems in the world and how I could solve them all, single-handedly of course (with God all things are possible), the less impact I had in my family, friendships, and local community. And so, I eventually decided that for me to be faithful to the good news of Jesus I had to give up on my dream of changing the world and adopt the harsh reality of changing myself and my world.

Back in 2008 I wrote a series of lectures to be used in a seminary course on Pastoral Ministry and this process from “the” to “my” was obviously at the forefront of my thoughts as I wrote. For instance, part of the first lecture reads:

“In the American context, many pastors confuse the call of God to do “great things” with the wider culture’s obsession with celebrity. It is common to hail as hero the pastor who takes up the martyr’s cross and sacrifices his family, friends, and neighbors for the sake of writing his magnum opus that will change the face of Christianity or for the sake of going on the speaking circuit. These tasks are not necessarily bad if the pastor is able to do it out of a sincere love for Christ and if this devotion to Christ is evident by service to neighbor (which includes our family, it will do well to remember). But oftentimes what s/he has really sacrificed is the Christ mandated call to love neighbor as self for his/her own desires of celebrity and recognition or a subjective belief that God has truly called them to this or that particular task. The common sentiment to “do great things for God” can easily become a call to “do great things for myself using God.” That is to say, many will at some point use God as a scapegoat and as justification for their lust for power and celebrity in a twisted version of “don’t blame me, the devil made me do it.” Whether conscious or unconscious, it is never right for the pastor to blame his neglect of family, friends, and local community on God’s call.

I would perhaps not state it so emphatically today, but it has become more evident to me that if the Gospel is about incarnation and about giving up positions of power to be with those who have no power, then the most useful I can be to the Kingdom of God is to incarnate myself in my local community rather than trying to establish my “platform” as a Christian celebrity. If we truly believe that the Kingdom of God is upside down then we should aspire to be the unknown servant, not the keynote speaker. We should aspire to be the unnoticed servant, not the celebrated author. But I don’t. We don’t.

May I continue to learn what it means to be incarnational, to imitate the one who both lived and died as a nobody. To stop trying to be the Savior of the world and to be present with those in my world.

“Cowardice wants only to concern itself with the really important,big things, not in order to carry something out wholeheartedly but to be flattered by doing something that is noble and great. Yet hiding behind the exalted is nothing but an excuse for not conquering all the little things…”

– Soren Kierkegaard

The Gay Checklist

Posted on by jbyas

There are many churches who are currently wrestling with what to do about the growing number of “the gays” in their community. Some of them believe that being gay is a choice. Others say it’s not. Some of them believe that being gay is a sin. Other say it’s not. But in my tradition almost all of them agree that gay sex, even within a long-term monogamous relationship, is sinful.*

Okay. Let’s suppose it is. Then based on a Jesus who asks us to work on the plank in our own eye before trying to remove the gay speck in that gay dude’s eye—and assuming you’re not gay—here is a basic checklist for when you get to single out a gay person in your church and tell them they have to repent, thereby making them feel like they don’t belong or are a second-class citizen in your church:

As a church, we have asked every unmarried couple in our congregation if they are having sex. If so, we must ask them to stop. If they refuse, we have to question their Christian faith and perhaps pull out some church discipline on them and eventually kick them out (or the passive-aggressive cold-shoulder-until-you-leave equivalent).

As a church, we have looked over every person’s checkbook to see if they are greedy and/or lovers of money. If so, we must ask them to agree to a plan to be more generous. If they refuse, we have to question their Christian faith and perhaps pull out some church discipline on them and eventually kick them out (or the passive-aggressive cold-shoulder-until-you-leave equivalent).

As a church, we have looked at every male’s computer to see if they have watched porn in the past month. If they have, we must ask them to agree to accountability and a password protected internet. And give their mothers & wives the password. If they refuse, we have to question their Christian faith and perhaps pull out some church discipline on them and eventually kick them out (or the passive-aggressive cold-shoulder-until-you-leave equivalent).

As a church, we have looked at every member of the congregation’s schedule to determine what idols are in their lives, the things that are more important than God. If they have even one, we must stone them (sorry, Old Testament) remind them that they “will not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9-10) and if they don’t repent, we have to question their Christian faith and perhaps pull out some church discipline on them and eventually kick them out (or the passive-aggressive cold-shoulder-until-you-leave equivalent).

As a church, we have filled out a survey to determine if our pastors are good teachers. If any fail the test, we must ask them to step down (1 Tim. 3:2) or at least agree to a rigorous process of learning from Rob Bell, Mark Driscoll, or Rick Warren (depending on your preference).

As a church, we have looked into our own hearts to see if we are being judgmental and hypocritical, discriminating against sins that are “obvious” and/or do not affect us (the speck) while not taking seriously the sins that do (the plank).

. . . Of course we haven’t even touched anger, bitterness, arrogance, pride, deceit, emotional & physical abuse/violence, selfishness, gluttony, etc. — and whatever you believe is normative from the Old Testament.

*Or as we heteros call this type of relationship, “marriage.”

I Still Stand as an Evangelical for Gay Marriage

Posted on by jbyas

I say to my fellow evangelical Christians who voted in North Carolina yesterday to ban gay marriage in a constitutional amendment, I get it. I know why you felt you had to vote the way you did. You aren’t out to oppress anyone, hate anyone, or even judge anyone. You honestly think you are loving them by making them unable to marry. You might not even like the conclusion you have come to, but your view of the Bible, the United States, and Christian ethics demanded it.

But I also recognize I probably don’t share your view of the Bible, the United States, or Christian ethics. So in addition to grace and compassion toward those with whom I disagree, how should I respond?*

Yesterday, hundreds of thousands of evangelical Christians used their vote as an opportunity to “stand up for their faith” against gay marriage. But my faith requires that I stand up for equality and with people who do not enjoy the same rights that I do.

We will probably not ever agree. And that’s okay. They are still my family. But here are a few reasons why I still believe evangelicals should support gay marriage:

Number One: Supporting Gay Marriage is not Supporting Sin. I know it is hard to grasp, but this matter has nothing to do with whether or not homosexuality is a sin. If it does, then you are probably being inconsistent since there are lots of things that Christians consider “sinful” that they do not legislate against. For instance, if God wants us as a nation to live by his laws, why are we okay supporting the freedom of religion? Shouldn’t we be out trying to ban other religions? If we are okay with freedom of religion,which is a law that basically mandates that our country allow for idolatry (according to the Christian), aren’t we being hypocritical?

Now, if this were about gay folks in church leadership or even church membership, we would have to address whether or not gay sex is a sin (which is another issue entirely on its own). But Paul seems to make it very clear that Christians have absolutely no place to judge the behavior of non-Christians:

9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral . . . . In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sisterbut is sexually immoral . . . 12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. . . .” -1 Corinthians 5:9-13a

Instead of focusing on “judging those inside” and creating a “city on a hill,” evangelicals are very good at making sure people who are not Christians know that they are “breaking the rules” of Christianity. And as such, we have gained the reputation for being judgmental, a moniker well-deserved for the most part. It is God’s place to judge the world, it is our place to love it. And just like the story we find in Adam & Eve, when we put ourselves in God’s place, we make a mess of things.

Number Two: To Love is to Empty Ourselves of Power. We cannot legislate people into the Kingdom of God, we cannot politically strong-arm people into becoming Christians. To think we can is to win the battle and utterly lose the war. It is also to misunderstand the emptying of God in Jesus Christ, the most powerful one who shows his power in powerlessness, the one who was God in his very nature but didn’t take advantage of that power but instead emptied himself and became a servant (Phil 2), even to his betrayer, even to the point of dying as a traitor to his state. Does love mean legislating a person’s morality according to a worldview they do not share? That does not sound like love, that sounds like a paternalistic power trip.

I would rather show people the love of Jesus by supporting them in their fight for equality, to stand with them, even if they are gay, hell, even if they are my enemies. My main goal as an evangelical Christian is to reflect the resurrected Christ and his Kingdom, not put it into law. It is to invite people in, not force them in against their will.

And while many Christians believe the “Christian” thing to do is to keep Christianity in power, I believe the “Christian” thing to do is empty ourselves of power, to give up our legislating and to take up our cross. I believe Jesus is on the side of those without power and his kingdom is one of equality, where no one is a second-class citizen, whether that be conservative Christian, drug addict, GLBT, atheist, or politician. We all bear God’s image in this story.

Number Three: History Should Compel Us. I am not sure Christians realize that they were, for the most part, on the wrong side of the slave issue. The Bible was used regularly during the Civil War to support slavery as morally acceptable. Not only that, but by taking care of the “less than human blacks,” the white slave owners were being quite compassionate, taking care of a race that couldn’t survive in the civilized world on their own. It was so “obvious” that the Bible supported slavery. . .

And, lest we forget, it was a Christian culture that kept women from being able to vote until only 100 years ago. I am ashamed that a “Christian” culture didn’t support or even acknowledge the equality of women until . . . well, in some Christian circles, they still don’t. By the way, in many circles, the same oppressive structure presents itself with women as with gays. We love you emotionally and even personally, but not enough to actually give up my privileged position as the man/straight in power.

The way I see the text of the prophets, the life of Jesus, and the trajectory of the New Testament, I would much rather be held accountable to God for fighting for someone to have the same rights I enjoy (sorry God, I assumed I should fight for the rights of those who didn’t have them) than to be held accountable to God for excluding rights from people for the sake of religious rules (sorry God, I thought I was supposed to tell the world how sinful they are and that my government should privilege Christian culture at the expense of other people).

I might be wrong. If studies show that children of gay parents are somehow disadvantaged or if our society does in fact begin to fall apart because gay people can marry, then perhaps I will change my mind. But for now that’s a risk I am willing to take for the sake of people knowing that there are Christians who stand with them in their struggle to be seen as equals in the eyes of their government.

If the Church wants to keep marriage between a man and a woman because of their religious convictions, so be it. Remember, this isn’t about the “sinfulness of homosexuality.” I understand that stance within the Church. But I will not support using the government’s power to coerce powerless non-Christians into behaving like Christians. That, to me, seems thoroughly un-Christian. It is the Spirit of God who transforms the heart, not the laws of the powerful.

*This is an updated, expanded, and edited version of a post I wrote back in February when a similar event occurred.

Unity & Diversity

Posted on by jbyas

For my first post back after taking the summer off to be insane as a TA for summer hebrew I want to acknowledge something that has really hit me as a pastor.

We speak of unity in the midst of diversity in churches, but what we typically mean is one of two things:
1. We all think alike so that our diversity is really only make believe so that we can say we have “unity in diversity.”
2. We all avoid the major issues that we disagree on so as to again pretend that we have unity where there is none.
Why isn’t there unity between Democrat Christians and Republican Christians? Why no unity between Protestant Christians and Catholic Christians? Why no unity between “conservative” Christians and “liberal” Christians?
Well, you’ll say, because insert my position here is right and insert the “other” position here is wrong. If they would just see that they’re wrong, then we’d have unity. What kind of unity is that? It’s supposed to be unity in the midst of diversity. Why can’t we see that the resurrection of Christ is so much more important than the other issues that divide us? That’s like not speaking to your sister because she wears GAP and you wear Banana Republic. The thing that unites makes the thing that divides almost superficial. 
I know, we’ll still say, “But my issue is different. I am defending biblical Christianity.” And I’ll say…point proven.
If there is one thing my heart is set on for this year it’s to more fully understand the mess we’ve made by making mountains out of theological mole hills and by defending fringe doctrine over unity in the Body.