would it be okay if the American CotN died by 2050 due to doctrinal stances?

[Todd Erickson]

In order to maintain it's standard of holiness, the church may have to/is declare standards of behavior which will, at length, render it completely unpalatable to much of the youth of america. Will the church be willing to stand strong on those stances of holiness, even if it means the end of the American branch of the church?

What if there is no way to be relevant or attractive in a holiness context that will draw the current generation? Will we be true to the calling and mission of the church by allowing it to Gracefully die? if we changed to embrace the current generation incoming, would that be too dire a change to the actual character of the church?

Is it really a bad thing if the church dies here, and becomes something else?

[Cam Pence]

In order to maintain it's standard of holiness, the church may have to/is declare standards of behavior which will, at length, render it completely unpalatable to much of the youth of america. Will the church be willing to stand strong on those stances of holiness, even if it means the end of the American branch of the church?

What if there is no way to be relevant or attractive in a holiness context that will draw the current generation? Will we be true to the calling and mission of the church by allowing it to Gracefully die? if we changed to embrace the current generation incoming, would that be too dire a change to the actual character of the chut really a bad thing if the church dies here, and becomes something else?

In what specific ways do you think our stance on holiness is not relevant and unpalatable to American youth?

[Kyle Borger]

The COTN is not important now. Jesus is. People are not attracted to a church they are attracted to Jesus through the Holy Spirit. It is the Holy Spirit that does the work. Any attempt to attract on our part is a false witness. It isnt about the design of a building, or the music, or the preaching, or the programs. It is about the work of the Holy Spirit through God's willing children.

The COTN is an expression of our witness. It is a community that is bound through common belief and understanding. But the church does not save and does not have power. The church is God's children expressing God's love and allowing the Holy Spirit to work.

So can the COTN die? Yes because God is not dependent upon the Nazarene church to express the truth of holy living.

Will it? I don't think so. There are many in our church that are looking for ways to obey the Holy Spirit and to share the truth of the Holy Spirit not from within church walls but from within shared relationships with those who do not know Jesus.

[Jim Chabot]

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

What we shouldn't do is pay any mind to our chances of survival, this isn't a business or a club or an entertainment enterprise. We seek to follow the One that the Scriptures tell us of. Should we grow or should we fail, relevance to our culture will not be a factor.

Should we faithfully follow His Word and pursue and promote Scriptural Holiness, our tribe will increase. Or our God is not actually alive. If e cannot trust His guidance, then lets lock the doors and go home now.

[Dwayne Petry]

If the Church, (CotN included)looks like the world, their is no attraction! We are "called" to be different, A HOLY PEOPLE!

[Craig Laughlin]

When we die it will not be because of our theology but our religious subculture and the arrogance of thinking we have it all figured out and don't need to change. History is littered with such movements, we are no exception. We will go down proudly proclaiming that we are right and all the rest of the world is wrong...

No it won't matter. Happens all the time and God is already raising up lots of other churches and nondenomination denominations to take our place. It is sad for someone like me that is a 4 generation Nazarene on one side and 3 on the other. I always dreamed my children and grandchildren would be Nazarene. Children maybe, grandchildren probably not.

[Nate Pruitt]

I see what happened, Todd, finally getting your other thread locked you decided to light another wildfire.

I do have some thoughts on this but can't articulate them on such a lack of sleep, so I'm going to bed for now. I will return... if this is still unlocked, haha.

[Todd Erickson]

In what specific ways do you think our stance on holiness is not relevant and unpalatable to American youth?

I think that the church is going to increasingly find itself in difficult waters maintaining it's current stance against homosexuals, but I don't think that it can necessarily change that stance and remain what it is.

So either the American church will have to maintain a hardline against them, and shrink as a result as their choices become less and less representative of the population, or change, in which case they won't be what they are. As others have pointed out, this is not a justice issue like women's sufferage or civil rights, and the issue is actively proscribed by the bible. To change how the church responds to this issue would be to change internal, important things about how we read and respond to Scripture.

I think that anybody who says "no, there will be a growing number of our children and our children's children who think that homosexuality is a sin, and those who actively profess to be such are sinners, and are disruptive to a community seeking holiness when they will not declare for celibacy and self control are likely not a good fit for the holiness tradition, and thus the church is going to continue growing" is kidding themselves, it's not where the culture is going. But to whatever degree folks who hold to that principal are directly representative of the CotN Holiness tradition (which is not to be understood as the same as Wesleyan, necessarily), it's a very counter cultural declaration.

Will the church be willing to accept a graceful death if that's where their place within the American culture takes them? I suspect that the CotN will continue to grow in other nations and cultures in the forms that it has there, which is why I have specifically spoken of the American church.

[Todd Erickson]

I see what happened, Todd, finally getting your other thread locked you decided to light another wildfire.

I do have some thoughts on this but can't articulate them on such a lack of sleep, so I'm going to bed for now. I will return... if this is still unlocked, haha.

They actually asked me before they locked it. I simply thought about this and thought I'd ask. Shea told me I'd mostly get dismissed as cynical and bitter, but so far that fortunately hasn't been the case.

[Hans Deventer]

I simply thought about this and thought I'd ask. Shea told me I'd mostly get dismissed as cynical and bitter, but so far that fortunately hasn't been the case.

Not by me, but I agree your avatar is at least 90 degrees twisted

To me, I'm impressed that with your history and how, you being you, you still haven't given up on the faith. Hats off, hold on, and do keep rocking the boat!

[Hans Deventer]

If the Church, (CotN included)looks like the world, their is no attraction! We are "called" to be different, A HOLY PEOPLE!

In what respect, Dwayne? We could all be wearing a purple sock on our head and we'd surely be very different and set apart. As I understand it, being set apart is not a goal in itself. Nor being different. I think the holiness is found here:

Ephesians 4:17 Now this I affirm and insist on in the Lord: you must no longer live as the Gentiles live, in the futility of their minds. 18 They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of their ignorance and hardness of heart. 19 They have lost all sensitivity and have abandoned themselves to licentiousness, greedy to practise every kind of impurity. 20That is not the way you learned Christ! 21 For surely you have heard about him and were taught in him, as truth is in Jesus. 22 You were taught to put away your former way of life, your old self, corrupt and deluded by its lusts, 23 and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, 24 and to clothe yourselves with the new self, created according to the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.

25 So then, putting away falsehood, let all of us speak the truth to our neighbours, for we are members of one another. 26Be angry but do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger, 27 and do not make room for the devil. 28 Thieves must give up stealing; rather let them labour and work honestly with their own hands, so as to have something to share with the needy. 29 Let no evil talk come out of your mouths, but only what is useful for building up, as there is need, so that your words may give grace to those who hear. 30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with which you were marked with a seal for the day of redemption. 31 Put away from you all bitterness and wrath and anger and wrangling and slander, together with all malice, 32 and be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ has forgiven you.

[Steven Martinez]

As long as we continue to serve the poor (this includes all areas in life not just material) we will survive. I believe that when Jesus reminded his disciples that the poor will always remain amongst us that He essentially told us that the Church has job security. The CoTN was founded on a principle of serving the most wretched. Fortunately the world seems to have little to no love for the poor so the competition is quite small.

[Jim Chabot]

To change how the church responds to this issue would be to change internal, important things about how we read and respond to Scripture.

This is semantic spin Todd. Lets just be honest and admit that this internal change requires that we ignore and supplant Scripture.

Scripture speaks pretty clearly on this issue.

No temptation is sin in and of itself. Same sex urges are temptation, they are not sinful unless they are satisfied.

Homosexual activity is sinful.

Homosexual activity that becomes a lifestyle will keep someone from heaven.

We are a new creation when we are born again.

There exists victory over sin and it's temptations may be avoided.

Should someone claim Christ and be involved in sexual sin, they must be put out of the church.

The three statements that I have bolded are plainly said and unequivocally spoken in Scripture. No amount of spin short of full out delusion will erase these statements.

Truly to abandon the truth of Scripture is to reduce us to pathetic misguided religious functionaries desperately whoring after popular culture chasing an illusive hope to be relevant. Why would we even want to survive? And in the end how would we hope to escape hell? Better a millstone would be hung around our collective necks that to contemplate this course away from God.

[Dwayne Petry]

In what respect, Dwayne? let all of us speak the truth to our neighbours,

How about this truth, not ours but GOD's. We do not have the choice of what is sin and what is not sin. This is not "rocket science". 1 Cor. 6:9-11

By taking the purple sock off our head and quit trying to "look" different, and "be" different! We are called by a Holy God, to be a Holy People. We both know that this does not "call " us to separate us from the world and live in little groups of Christians, cowering in fear of the Evil One. No! Our Heavenly Father expects His Holy People to live "among" our neighbors, so that they will be attracted to Jesus through our Holy living. The world will be attracted to Jesus Christ because of the "difference" in our lives, particularly I believe, because of the joy in our lives as we live out the command of "be Holy as I am Holy"! Sexual purity, heterosexual and well as homosexual, is included in that call to Holy living.

If our lives are not "set apart" and "different", and I am not going to insult your theological knowledge by trying to list what a Holy life should look like (the scripture you referenced fits in very well describing what a Holy life should include), then we (the Church) have lost our appeal to "attract" the lost to Jesus Christ.

GOD, who was serious enough about saving the lost (you and I) to send His Son to die for us, expects us to be serious enough about the lost (our neighbors) to live the "truth" of Holiness among them.

[Benjamin Burch]

This is semantic spin Todd. Lets just be honest and admit that this internal change requires that we ignore and supplant Scripture.

Scripture speaks pretty clearly on this issue.

No temptation is sin in and of itself. Same sex urges are temptation, they are not sinful unless they are satisfied.

Homosexual activity is sinful.

Homosexual activity that becomes a lifestyle will keep someone from heaven.

We are a new creation when we are born again.

There exists victory over sin and it's temptations may be avoided.

Should someone claim Christ and be involved in sexual sin, they must be put out of the church.

The three statements that I have bolded are plainly said and unequivocally spoken in Scripture. No amount of spin short of full out delusion will erase these statements.

Truly to abandon the truth of Scripture is to reduce us to pathetic misguided religious functionaries desperately whoring after popular culture chasing an illusive hope to be relevant. Why would we even want to survive? And in the end how would we hope to escape hell? Better a millstone would be hung around our collective necks that to contemplate this course away from God.

I just don't think it is this clear or this cut and dried. I wish it were.

[Hans Deventer]

I just don't think it is this clear or this cut and dried. I wish it were.

I think there is a reason why it isn't cut and dried. God could have easily inspired people to address issues of our time. He chose not to do so. Pretty much aligns with the idea that YHWH is not like Allah, using a "shut up and submit" approach. In fact, thinking about the several instances where people managed to change His mind, it seems He much rather interacts with us. You'd almost think He is looking for a relationship rather than mere submittance.

[Michael Flowers]

The American COTN will not be dead by 2050 over doctrine issues, especially not of the homosexual issues. There is nothing to indicate that conservative Americans will cease to exist who do not support same sex relationships. If you try to say that my generation (I'm 25) is an indication that the world is going to become ok with homosexuality because my generation doesn't see a problem then you are mistaken. The vast majority of my friends 95% probably at least are against homosexual relationships. If the Church of the Nazarene in the US ceases to exist it will be because we have failed to live up to the gospel which we have been handed down from Christ, not because we chose to stand for Him.

[Benjamin Burch]

The American COTN will not be dead by 2050 over doctrine issues, especially not of the homosexual issues. There is nothing to indicate that conservative Americans will cease to exist who do not support same sex relationships. If you try to say that my generation (I'm 25) is an indication that the world is going to become ok with homosexuality because my generation doesn't see a problem then you are mistaken. The vast majority of my friends 95% probably at least are against homosexual relationships. If the Church of the Nazarene in the US ceases to exist it will be because we have failed to live up to the gospel which we have been handed down from Christ, not because we chose to stand for Him.

While I agree with you in regards to our generation, I don't see it with our kids. I think it will be very rare for any of our kids to buy homosexuality as sinful.

[Todd Erickson]

This is semantic spin Todd. Lets just be honest and admit that this internal change requires that we ignore and supplant Scripture.

Scripture speaks pretty clearly on this issue.

No temptation is sin in and of itself. Same sex urges are temptation, they are not sinful unless they are satisfied.

Homosexual activity is sinful.

Homosexual activity that becomes a lifestyle will keep someone from heaven.

We are a new creation when we are born again.

There exists victory over sin and it's temptations may be avoided.

Should someone claim Christ and be involved in sexual sin, they must be put out of the church.

The three statements that I have bolded are plainly said and unequivocally spoken in Scripture. No amount of spin short of full out delusion will erase these statements.

Truly to abandon the truth of Scripture is to reduce us to pathetic misguided religious functionaries desperately whoring after popular culture chasing an illusive hope to be relevant. Why would we even want to survive? And in the end how would we hope to escape hell? Better a millstone would be hung around our collective necks that to contemplate this course away from God.

Jim, please stop trying to argue something which is not part of my OP. I am not here to argue whether homosexuality is wrong, I am saying that our children (my children) will likely grow up thinking that keeping gays from marriage is cruel and unusual, and won't be a part of it. This is much like educating our children that education and science are wrong because the earth is only 6000 years old...we can make them effectively Amish and tell them to stay away from the world, but if they are educated by the world around them, they will quickly have issues with "inconvenient truths" which seem to stand strongly against the claims of the denomination, and we will often lose them if those are fighting points.

So don't, please, argue with me over whether the bible says this is wrong. You derailed my other thread by only focusing on whether homosexuality is wrong, please don't do it here. If you insist on doing it here, I will ask the Sysops to take action against you; I will not lose another conversation to your desire to dominate the conversation and twist it to your ends. You have been warned.

[Shea Zellweger]

They actually asked me before they locked it. I simply thought about this and thought I'd ask. Shea told me I'd mostly get dismissed as cynical and bitter, but so far that fortunately hasn't been the case.

I'm quite happy to be proven wrong. That seems to be the general trend when you start a thread. The fact that it didn't happen this time makes me think there may be some hope for dialogue yet...

[Sarah Smith]

Todd, if your children embrace the wider culture rather than the clear teachings of scripture, and because of that reject the CotN, so be it.

So be it if the whole culture rejects us and the denomination dies out. It isn't our job to be popular, but it is our job to speak the truth.

[Hans Deventer]

Todd, if your children embrace the wider culture rather than the clear teachings of scripture

There aren't that many clear teachings in the Scriptures. If there were, there would not have been so much discussion from the very start. And no, from Acts 15 on, we cannot simply dismiss others as dishonest. So to me, the words "clear teachings of the Scriptures" only convey that somebody THINKS certain things are clear in the Scriptures. That's all. It undermines rather than strengthens one's argument.

[Nate Pruitt]

First, I have homosexual friends. I understand it's an issue. It's not the issue, though. As it turns out I've had way more friends leave the CotN over the consumption of alcohol issue than homosexuality. Most churches I've been at, and most pastors I know, don't waste time and breath on beating down homosexuality because it isn't a pervasive issue. Why expend so much energy shadow boxing a phantom issue when there are real demons to address in the life of the local congregation? Now I say this having been at a church where a homosexual gentleman came rather frequently. He is my friend and I made a point to make sure he understood he was always welcome, especially on those times when he came just to hear me preach. We remain friends on Facebook and I truly love him and want God's blessings in his life. I don't see any reason to move away from the official stance of the CotN about homosexuality because it in no way impedes me from offering him Christlike love. At our current setting we have a lesbian couple who come to church fairly regularly. Guess what? We're not as concerned about un-lesbian-ing them (yes, I made up that word) because we have bigger issues like helping them both remain drug addiction free and helping with the kids the one has and their special needs.

None of this would be much of an issue if Protestantism hadn't been so quick to drop marriage as a sacrament. While it plays out differently than how baptism and the Eucharist do, and isn't a necessary sacrament for all, it should still be so consecrated. The truth is that it doesn't just make those in such churches have a harder time arguing against forms of marriage that are God ordained (note that the Bible has multiple marriage situations, but God & Christ-specifically only endorse the marriage of one man and one woman). We also wouldn't have such a pervasive culture of divorce. There's just no way.

Personally, I don't care what the government tries to say about homosexual marriage, what concerns me is when they try to interfere with churches functioning within their beliefs (the whole fantasy of separation is just that, a fantasy, as it only exists on specific politically driven occasions). This is a cut and dried attack on religious freedom. (Hey! Something is cut and dried in this situation!) As a minister who cannot find biblical support for homosexual "marriage" I cannot condone performing a religious ceremony for one (I could care less if a couple is granted a state-issued union or "marriage" before a Justice of the Peace, I just can't in good standing with the Bible conduct such a thing).

Doctrine, as Michael pointed out above, may well prove more damaging for our denomination. Of course that assumes that more than those who have been involved in the academy and in the theological leadership of the church (pastors, lay leaders) really pay attention to the doctrine of the CotN and take time to care. We won't help our cause for sound doctrine by espousing non-biblical views (re: homosexuality). Sorry, it would just show how little we care about what scripture does say. We can and should offer ALL PEOPLE a welcome embrace, a loving church home and support in their times of need. We don't have to cater to their desires outside of what Scripture says- whether that is a homosexual who wants a church-endorsed marriage, a wealthy person who doesn't believe in Christian stewardship, or a deeply concerned individual who feels that allows room for factions, dissensions, gossip and slander.

I hope that makes sense. At least I'm awake now.

[Todd Erickson]

Let's change the scope a little, if only to avoid folks who believe I've waved a red flag in front of them, and need to charge it.

We are currently in the fourth generation of the CotN, which itself was an off-shoot of the Methodist church and various other churches. At the time that the church was instituted, there was a Zeitgeist in the concept of Holiness that the church lives around and feels called to.

But as Dr. Oord has written so prodigiously and excellently on, the heart of Holiness is Love, rather than vice versa.

As we move into this new century, we face a rapidly changing culture that in many ways is about very different things and beliefs than were held to be true or normative when the CotN was initially started. Certainly, there are active threads about whether the first Nazarene church would recognize the modern church, and welcome it as the same denomination. Certainly, we're seeing generational changes between those who would define their church by Wiley, and others who would define it more by Wynkoop.

As we move into the fifth and sixth generations, and as Nate has clearly stated above, we will find more things that are "doctrinal distinctives" of the CotN that belong to the culture of the early 1900's, rather than the current age. As our denomination states that these things are non-negotiable, and define our denomination (drinking, movies, dancing, homosexuality, music, revivals, what have you...also clearly denoting that whatever else the CotN is, it increasingly is not Via Media) the grandchildren of the current folks in control of the denomination will likely be looking for something very different than their grandparents took for granted.

Steve argues that as long as there remain poor to serve, the CotN will have a niche, but I think that that avoids the question. This still mandates that youth who want to serve the poor while giving up a whole raft of things that were far more significant to the culture 150 years ago will be the mainstay of the church. My argument is that there are going to be fewer and fewer of those, and that as we lack what Eric and Ben would both refer to as an Ecclesiology which gives us appropriate language for why we do what we do, the church is going to grow increasingly incapable of explaining itself to those grandchildren (and their children) in any way other than "because we've always done it that way, and that's what it means to be holy".

I would argue that if people really want to serve the poor, then they'd be better off working with the Catholics, or a number of other mainline traditions which are far more invested in America's poor than the American CotN is. Far more of the church's attention, nationally, is on international missions, than on our own poor.

Though as also seen in my previous thread in the theology forum, we also have a current generational dissonance which says that the poor are not really poor, or they are lazy, or they are looking for an easy break, and so can be dismissed. To whatever degree that attitude remains constant, it represents a church looking for reasons to define who they will serve, which is also a denomination looking to tell God where He can work.

It's also worth nothing, the issues which make or break the Cotn in New England are different than they are in the gulf states, or south central, or northwestern. We cannot be prescriptive in our judgement of how well things are going for any topic based on how they are where we live personally.

I was at a district assembly where a member of the NPH was bemoaning the fact that all of the great spiritual leaders of the church have been dying off, he seemed to perceive the end of an age. As we go into the next one, to whatever degree this is an accurate perception, what is it truly to be this church, and what is it worth to us to remain so?

[Craig Laughlin]

As we move into the fifth and sixth generations, and as Nate has clearly stated above, we will find more things that are "doctrinal distinctives" of the CotN that belong to the culture of the early 1900's, rather than the current age. As our denomination states that these things are non-negotiable, and define our denomination (drinking, movies, dancing, homosexuality, music, revivals, what have you...also clearly denoting that whatever else the CotN is, it increasingly is not Via Media) the grandchildren of the current folks in control of the denomination will likely be looking for something very different than their grandparents took for granted.

I think we may be talking past one another a little here. Drinking, movies, dancing and revivals are not doctrinal but religious culture. More importantly those are already pretty much dead. There are pockets of folks in the US that still get excited about the issues and they are disproportionately represented on Naznet giving the impression that those are big issues. What will happen is what always happens in the COTN. We will wait until there is functionally no life at all in them and then we will quietly change them. (already done this with movies and a bunch of others)

Homosexuality will probably be painful. We need our manual statement to come into line with our theology and not sound like we are breathing fire. However, if we will follow scripture and truly love folks in a homosexual lifestyle we will be fine. Frankly I have several homosexual people attending my church. They were attracted to the church for it's love. They about had a heart attack when they read the manual statement but after talking it through with me they are okay. They know where the COTN stands and that they will never be in leadership but for this stage in there life (they are young adults) They are loved. For the record I love all kinds of sinners including those who sin by judging others. I let those folks be a part of the church as well.

I think we need to rediscover that it is possible to really love someone and still disagree. I don't know that the COTN will follow this path but many, many local churches that actually believe our Holiness theology applies to the real world will and they will keep the tradition alive after the denomination has completely fallen into irrelevance. (Let's not talk about how far down that road they may already be)

[Todd Erickson]

Craig, to what degree would you say that factions of the Cotn misidentify religious culture as non-negotiable aspects of holiness?

[Steven Burton]

How's the quote go? "The church is a hospital for the sinner not a museum of saints."

[Craig Laughlin]

Craig, to what degree would you say that factions of the Cotn misidentify religious culture as non-negotiable aspects of holiness?

Depends a great deal on where they live. Rural folks in general, the South and the Indy general region (not sure what to call that area, upper midwest?) are going to think those things are doctrine. They are much more AHM and have a hard time distinguishing between doctrine and application. Urban/Suburban areas (with some notable exceptions) and the coasts are probably past most of those issues. (I think a lot of the larger Midwest might confuse them but they are not very passionate about it and many would not)

Part of the slowness of change is that for many of the urban and coastal churches what the denomination says is not a big life and death issue. They don't want to fight about it, they just ignore it. (Again there is a long tradition of this in the COTN)

I think there is also a growing "big church verse little church" issue. Larger churches are much more independent and need the denomination a lot less. (we have seen this with the money issue in recent years)

Long answer to say I'm not really sure I could give a percentage breakdown. I do know this, those AHM folks are much more passionate about the politics of the church so they tend to try to control via the political structures. The folks on the other side have a tendency to say... Whatever... and move on. This makes the AHM look like they are bigger and more powerful than they really are.

I noticed you live in AR. probably a place were folks think of themselves first as members of the COTN and second as members of a local church. Not like that out here.

[Steven Burton]

I noticed you live in AR. probably a place were folks think of themselves first as members of the COTN and second as members of a local church. Not like that out here.

Yup that is how it is in Texas as well. It COTN first then local church. I tend to think of things like that or bigger.

[Craig Laughlin]

Yup that is how it is in Texas as well. It COTN first then local church. I tend to think of things like that or bigger.

In my area that is not at all the case. They love the local church and can even be suspicious of the denomination.

[Steven Burton]

In my area that is not at all the case. They love the local church and can even be suspicious of the denomination.

Yup I am not surprised at all. I have gotten into heated discussion on the idea of denomination over local church before or I should say organized religion over local church. Its seem to boil down to a matter of trust in yourself over trust in people.

[Todd Erickson]

Church identity can be very curious. Depending on the cultural grouping we come from, we can strongly distrust organizations and how they may seek to define us, even while clinging to them for protection. This is always both the cost and promise of community.

One of the dangers of community is that, when it has existed for long enough, we may come to make broad assumptions about what that community is, or how it functions, that are no longer accurate. If the assumptions are stronger than our common language, then when those assumptions are broken, we will lose the ability to both be community, and to replicate.

[Paul DeBaufer]

When I was dislodged from the CotN I came to see that I had made an idol out of the denomination because it was for me CotN over the local church. I really don't consider myself part of my current denomination. I became a member of a local congregation my loyalties end there. If the UMC were to dissolve as I am typing I just couldn't bring myself to care too awfully much. If my local church were to dissolve I would consider it quite catastrophic.

[Steven Burton]

See for me the local church is not even the church but just a small portion of it. Whether this or that denomination falls is not that important to me. I rather be part of the whole than just part of the portion.

I still do have some loyalty to the CoTN but mainly because I grew up there and I like there stance of some things that are important to me. But over all I would rather go to a church that acknowledges the whole and not just its portion which I feel get done in a lot of churches.

[Billy Cox]

None of this would be much of an issue if Protestantism hadn't been so quick to drop marriage as a sacrament. While it plays out differently than how baptism and the Eucharist do, and isn't a necessary sacrament for all, it should still be so consecrated. The truth is that it doesn't just make those in such churches have a harder time arguing against forms of marriage that are God ordained (note that the Bible has multiple marriage situations, but God & Christ-specifically only endorse the marriage of one man and one woman). We also wouldn't have such a pervasive culture of divorce. There's just no way.

I've heard this position before and kind of brushed it off, but now I think that this may be the way forward. If the denomination wants to save marriage, it can do so by making it a sacrament rather than leaving it to civil authorities to define it I. List-Christian terms. If the culture has done unholy things with marriage, it's at least partly because Chrisitanity has not insisted in setting it apart.

[Cynthia Prentice]

The early church was surrounded by a culture that participated in just about every type of sexual activity we can imagine. Their world had parades with phallic statues, phallic wind chimes stirred by the wind outside of homes. They didn't decrease their standard of behavior...they increased their love and their servanthood, and, they got miles outside their comfort zone. They sat across the table and broke bread and ate unclean food. They shocked the world with their love. This gives me hope!

The following is from several years back. It was not written to address homosexuality. It was written as a message of hope. I think it is hard for most of us to grasp the reality of the culture of the world surrounding the early church. They reached these people...they led them into a relationship with Jesus. Man, that gives me hope. As most things put together for our church, the language is simple...and it was shared as a talk, not in written form and I don't have time to fix all the grammar but I'd like to share it as it gives a brief glimpse of the world in which they lived. Here is an excerpt of what was shared.

(fyi - this contains subject matter of a sexual nature)

What was the world like for the people of the early church?

People worshiped Dionysius…
His statues show him having long curly hair and dreamy eyes…the women loved him. He was the god of wine, life and ecstasy. In late February when the new wine was ready, festivals were held in celebration. Wine drinking contests were held until entire cities were completely intoxicated. His symbols were grapevines and the male sex organ and he promised life after death. In his fall festival, a parade would be formed to move through the town escorting a giant statue of the male sex organ. The worshipers would eat raw meat during these orgies (what text refers to as gluttony).

The animal, usually a bull, represented Dionysus, and eating it created a sense of identity with the god. It was eaten raw with the blood in it, guaranteeing a happy life after death. The men loved him…he stirred up their lust and the women loved him too. Every year married and unmarried women would drink, get drunk, eat raw bloody meat and then run and dance ecstatically through the mountains to be united with the god…and then they had orgies.It got so bad the Romans outlawed it. . (Bacchanalia - Festival of Bacchus)

In the early church there were followers of Jesus who had been followers of Dionysius. What did it mean to be a follower of Jesus after following this false god? It meant that true intimacy and life was found in a relationship with Jesus.

It meant that people were filled with the Holy Spirit and not drunkenness…that Joy came from God…not from a grape. There wasn’t a hang over…there was an after glow/ Everywhere a follower of Jesus went they were reminded of their old life. A new follower of Jesus walked out of the house and started down the street. There it was…on the corner....The statue of the male sex organ...and there was another statue on another corner…as a matter of fact they knew where every statue in the city was. Every time the wind blew…they heard the phallic wind chimes.

“God help me – I’m not going to look

“The parade is starting…God help me…not going to join in.”

“I want to drink…I want to forget my troubles…I want the sex!”

“God help me…give me your spirt!”

And God did help them. He gave them his Spirit and with his love they changed the world.


People also worshipped Pan.

Pan was the goat god…top half man, bottom half goat…ugly as can be. His temple was at the bottom of a large rock cliff…right at the mouth of a cave and people believed it was the Gate of Hades (at Caesarea Philippi - the setting for Jesus' words to Peter.) Pan’s followers would gather there and they would get worked up into a frenzy…that’s where we get the word panic, and pandemonium. They would then engage in prostitution and orgies with people and with goats. Yet, Jesus stood near the area of Pan and told Peter, “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the Gates of Hell will not overcome it.”

Then Jesus turned to the crowd and shouted,

“"If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will save it. What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit his very self?”

I can just imagine someone down in the mud with a goat looking up to the hill and wondering who that strange man was. In the early church there were followers of Jesus that used to be followers of Pan. What did it mean to them to be a follower of Jesus after following this false god? It meant they no longer went to bed at night with a sick knot in their stomach…they no longer had to wash mud and goat manure out of their hair.

God help me. It’s time for the festival. I’m not going to go. Draw near to me.

Friends coming up and asking, “Are you coming to Caesarea Phillipi with us? “

No…I follow Jesus now…not Pan.

Come on…Everyone is there.

God help me…give me Your Spirit.

And he did . He gave them his Spirit and with his love they changed the world.

People also worshipped Artemis….
It was believed she protected women during childbirth. The Artemis festival was on May 25 when the entire city and thousands of pilgrims came to seek the blessing of the goddess.
At this festival, a ceremonial parade would leave the great temple and wind throughout the city.
The priests gave their fertility to her…they were castrated. Young women saved their virginity to then offer it as prostitute priestesses. With dancing and music they would end the parade at the theater and place her statue on a pedestal. There would be erotic ceremonies and priestess prostitutes, Artemis’ birth would be reenacted with eunuch priests screaming and dancing.

In the early church there were followers of Jesus that had been followers of Artemis.

What did it mean to them to be a follower of Jesus after following this false goddess?

It meant the followers of Jesus would no longer have sons that grew up to be castrated priests… and they no longer presented their daughters as virgin prostitutes.

They looked to God to protect them during childbirth…not Artemis.

Imagine a young women who became a follower of Jesus giving birth to her baby.

“Offer sacrifices to Artemis…she will protect you!”

“No, I follow Jesus now. Paul wrote us a letter and it told us that we will be saved during childbirth. I can’t live that life anymore.”

“I’m scared. God help me! I want to offer incense but I won’t! It’s not right!”

“God give me your Spirit!”

And he did…He gave them his Spirit and with his love they changed the world.


Men used boys

In the world Paul was writing to…men would participate in orgies and sexual activities with adolescent boys. It was thought of as a “coming of age” experience. The men would often continue their sexual activity with the boys until it was time for the boys to marry. Then the older men would sometimes help the younger men find wives.

In the early church there were followers of Jesus that had participated in sexual activity with boys.

What did it mean to them to be a follower of Jesus after having lived a life like that? It meant the boys of the community got their childhood back. It meant the men no longer used children as sex objects. The men became faithful to their wives…their wives alone.


“God help me! My sexual craving is all I can think about!

I don’t want to put all the work into my relationship with my wife!

I don’t want to give in…help me to set my mind on you.

Feed the craving of my heart with your presence and love.

Teach me who you are!
God help me! I don’t want to go back to that life!

God give me Your Spirit.

And he did…he gave them his Spirit with his love they changed the world.

Listen to what Paul wrote to the people of Ephesus...the Gentiles...former pagans...that were now followers of Jesus.

1 Cor 6:9-11 NLT
9 Don't you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, 10 or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people—none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God. 11 Some of you were once like that. But you were cleansed; you were made holy; you were made right with God by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Have you ever had a knot in your stomach as you lay in bed getting read y to go to sleep at night.

Have you ever said to yourself…I will not do that thing…you fill in the blank…only to find yourself on the other side of sin…with waves of regret washing over you? There is hope! If there was hope for them…there is hope for us.

edited to add one more thought: We are the descendants of these pagans. We've got to remember that. The Jews who followed Jesus...complete with all their rules and purity...were scattered and as a result they were thrust into the pagan world and yet they brought the Kingdom of God with them. We, the descendants of these pagans would not be here on Naznet if they hadn't done this. Yet it is so easy to forget this. It is so easy to think of US (the church) and those SINNERS (the world)...and to forget how far outside their comfort zone those first Jewish followers of Jesus got in order to minister to a hurting world. That moves me.

[Todd Erickson]

As usual, Cynthia, the thank you button is not strong enough.

[Cam Pence]

I think that the church is going to increasingly find itself in difficult waters maintaining it's current stance against homosexuals, but I don't think that it can necessarily change that stance and remain what it is.

So either the American church will have to maintain a hardline against them, and shrink as a result as their choices become less and less representative of the population, or change, in which case they won't be what they are. As others have pointed out, this is not a justice issue like women's sufferage or civil rights, and the issue is actively proscribed by the bible. To change how the church responds to this issue would be to change internal, important things about how we read and respond to Scripture.

I think that anybody who says "no, there will be a growing number of our children and our children's children who think that homosexuality is a sin, and those who actively profess to be such are sinners, and are disruptive to a community seeking holiness when they will not declare for celibacy and self control are likely not a good fit for the holiness tradition, and thus the church is going to continue growing" is kidding themselves, it's not where the culture is going. But to whatever degree folks who hold to that principal are directly representative of the CotN Holiness tradition (which is not to be understood as the same as Wesleyan, necessarily), it's a very counter cultural declaration.

Will the church be willing to accept a graceful death if that's where their place within the American culture takes them? I suspect that the CotN will continue to grow in other nations and cultures in the forms that it has there, which is why I have specifically spoken of the American church.

Pretty late to since the focus seems be pretty much on homosexuality, but are there other issues you think the CotN will have with its stance on holiness besides the issue of homosexuality or is that the only real issue there will be?

[Todd Erickson]

Pretty late to since the focus seems be pretty much on homosexuality, but are there other issues you think the CotN will have with its stance on holiness besides the issue of homosexuality or is that the only real issue there will be?

It would probably help in the future if you would read the entire thread so far before responding, as I've already answered this.

[Cynthia Prentice]

As usual, Cynthia, the thank you button is not strong enough.

You know Todd, when I started my quest to understand the cultural setting of the New Testament I went to Jewish material to get a finer tuned view of the world of Jesus and secular historical sources to try to get a finer tuned view of the world of the early church. Most commentaries used phrases like "debauchery" when describing the pagan world of the Roman/Greek culture. I wanted to know more. I really wanted to feel what it was like to be back there and our commentaries try so hard not to be offensive in the descriptions of that world that I realized I didn't have an accurate picture. As I spent hour upon hour, day after day, in secular historical sources...I grew more and more excited. If they could reach their world with the love of Jesus...we can reach ours. Thank you for your thought provoking questions...we have all got to step up to the plate and serve, not just people outside the church but also within the church, treating each other with love if we are going to continue on as a denomination. May God help me to love like they loved.