Thursday, July 9, 2015

Buying Her Lies Hook, Line, and Sinker


"Everyone's a biblical literalist until you bring up gluttony or divorce or slavery or head coverings or Jesus' teachings on non-violence, or the 'abomination' of eating shellfish and the hell-worthy sin of calling people idiots...And in spite of the flood of emails I get each week condemning my support of women in ministry, I've never received so much as an open letter criticizing my refusal to wear a head covering...We may laugh at these examples or dismiss them silly, but the biblical language employed in these contexts is actually pretty strong: eating shellfish is an abomination, a bare head is a disgrace, gossips will not inherit the kingdom of God, careless words are punishable by hell, guys who leer at women should gouge out their eyes...Why do so many advocate making gay marriage illegal but not divorce, when Jesus never referenced the former but spoke quite negatively about the latter?"  

Then Rachel Held Evans wrote about the woman caught in adultery; "Jesus knelt down and scribbled in the sand before saying, 'He who is without sin can cast the first stone,'" but she failed to add what Jesus said to her  afterwards, "Go and sin no more."

This article, my friends, is why you MUST study the Bible and know Truth so when articles like this are being spread around the Internet like wildfire, you will be able to clearly see the lies being promoted in it. There is enough Truth in it to sound good, but it is filled with lies to promote a sinful lifestyle as being acceptable. It was written by Rachel Held Evans and many people love it and use it to support gay marriage as being okay, since there are many other sins in the Bible that people don't speak about. Let's examine her words more carefully since many baby Christians, those weak in their faith or those who don't know their Bible, will buy what she teaches hook, line, and sinker to justify sin, discredit the Bible, and explain that it is outdated.

 "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God" (I Corinthians 6:9, 10). If you are a believer in Jesus Christ, these sins should NOT be named among you!  Ephesians 4:19 states this about those who have rejected Truth; they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness. 

What about gluttony? Yes, we are called to be moderate in all things. I have taught about this before and I have called gluttony sin but it is NOT listed in the sins of the unrighteous who will not inherit eternal life.

What about divorce? Yes, we are commanded NOT to divorce. I have also taught this before, however, there are disagreements even in the church about this topic. Some believe it is always wrong and some do not. Jesus said, "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder" (Mark 10:9). Paul seems to allow it in the case of abandonment (I Corinthians 7:15). I have an article written by John Piper why he thinks divorce is always sin. I believe it is God's will to never divorce and I will NEVER advise anyone to ever get divorced. 

What about slavery? I'm not sure what she meant by this since much blood was shed in our country to rid it of slavery. Slavery is never condoned in the New Covenant under which all believers in Christ live under. In fact, Paul wrote if you can free yourself from it, by all means do it (1 Corinthians 7:21).

What about head coverings? The last two verses where Paul is speaking about head coverings end like this: "But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. BUT if any man seem to be contentious, we have NO such custom, neither the churches of God" (I Corinthians 11:15, 16). The churches don't dictate head coverings. If a woman wants to wear a head covering or not is her conviction and not sin either way. (There are many interpretations and disagreements over these verses.)

What about Jesus' teaching on non-violence? Yes, Jesus taught His followers to be at peace with all men as far as it depends upon them, to turn the other cheek and overcome evil with good, but our government is established to protect its people and punish wrongdoers: "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer" (Romans 13:1-6).

How about eating shellfish? This was the Law. We are no longer under the Law. We are under a New Covenant, the law of grace. The Gospels are Jesus' life and teachings to those living under the Law and Jesus explaining to them their desperate need for a Savior. All Christians need for life and godliness are in the New Covenant. Even the "idiot" thing and the lust He spoke about was directed to those living under the Law. He gave many illustrations narrowly defining the Law to show those living under the Law that there is NO way anyone could fulfill the Law and keep it perfectly. This is why they needed a Savior, who fulfilled the Law for them, paid the penalty for their sin and has given them eternal life, if they believe upon Him.

What about women preachers? Nope, forbidden by God. All qualifications for leadership in the church are to be held by men. Qualification for an elder or bishop: the HUSBAND of one wife (I Timothy 3:1). The qualification for deacons: the HUSBANDS of one wife (I Timothy 3:12). Done. This one was easy! If you go to a church with female elders or deacons, find a new church.

Finally, Jesus never spoke against gay marriage? He created and DEFINED marriage and it didn't include gay marriage! "But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder" (Mark 10:6-9).

The bottom line to this entire discussion is that there is only ONE sin that will keep you out of heaven: unbelief. If you refuse to believe in the risen Savior, that He has paid the penalty for all of your sins (past, present and future), you will not be saved. True believers will want to obey the Lord and His commands. They will not try to excuse sin in their lives since others sin by excusing theirs with "I'm just a sinner saved by grace." They will love others enough to speak Truth in love. They will desire to walk in the Spirit and not in the flesh. They will no longer have any desire to play in the mud. They will not try to justify any sin since they hate all sin and the consequences of it. They will always try to walk in love with the power of the Holy Spirit working mightily within them!

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
2 Timothy 4:3, 4

Comments (48)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Amazing post!! So on point for so many questions lately. I'm going to save this one!! Thank you, Lori!!
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
As someone pointed out to me years ago, rat poison is only 2% harmful but enough to kill. The other 98% is attractive filler.

Much needed post for all, thanks.
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
Dawn E. Brown's avatar

Dawn E. Brown · 507 weeks ago

We can twist Scripture to fit our own selfish wants.1Cor.11:5 And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head,it is just as though her head were shaved.6:If a woman does not cover her head she should have her hair cut off ,and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off ,she should cover her head.This seems pretty easy to understand.verse 10:For this reason ,and because of the angels,the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.I began wearing a covering 4 years ago, and I would never remove it.My testimony is the day I put it on Satan has come at me with trials and issues that most women probably are not confronted with.However, the protection God has afforded me,and the beauty He has allowed through my obedience,I can never describe.I was no threat to Satan til I was covered.I am not judging women who don't wear a covering, but I am saying I believe the full blessing of God could perhaps not be realized in their lives.Dawn E. Brown
7 replies · active 507 weeks ago
I really needed this post today. Thank you. I have read Rachel Evan's writings before, but after learning she supports sin, I no longer follow her. A huge goal I am working on now, while organizing my home, is to get rid of anything wicked as it says in the Bible. Anything that may hinder my relationship with God, or tempt me or cause me to doubt is going out the door. Even in my daughter's room.... My husband and I were talking about how so many toys and books focus on magic and spells. We feel compelled to get rid of those too. As hard as it has been with the Supreme Court ruling, I will say it has caused me to really and truly examine myself so I can be a light to others and do my best to avoid sin, at all costs. I feel stronger than ever about following God's word. Thanks for sharing this post, as they are very common arguments the LGBT community and their supporters give. They will steer the focus on anything else besides their sin. It's so disheartening to hear people say the Bible isn't accurate. A blogger even wrote that Paul was a cult leader... and yet they are "Christians"? I will no longer read anything that demeans God and His Holy word.
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
I see a lot of fallacies in what this woman said, and unfortunately they are very common today: first of all, Christianity has nothing to sell, we are not a company who changes the product because the customers are different, God is always the same. I understand that saying no to gay marriage and to homosexual acts means that you will be mocked, criticized and perhaps hated and it is hard; sometimes when I see people trying to change the Truth I wonder: do we really believe that the Truth is the best for us? That living how God wants us to live will make us holier and happier and that the world's ways will never make us really happy? Because if we do, we should understand that when this world is telling gay people to live the gay lifestyle is condemning them to unhappiness, to running from a relationship to another in order to find something that they will never find in lust: real love.
Also, I think that fighting gay "marriage" is not only a matter of faith. Our minds tell us that homosexual acts are wrong and that gay "marriage" is no marriage at all. A Christian can never support gay marriage, but I think everyone capable of reasoning will never support It as well.
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
Melissa M.'s avatar

Melissa M. · 507 weeks ago

Thank you for addressing these concerns.
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
I have a friend that grew up strict Southern Baptist. (So did I for a time) She wasn't allowed to cut her hair- ever! But her hair is thin and naturally oily. It looks better kept short. 10 years after she left home and cut hair she is still given verbal lashings over it. When she visits her mom she is told she looks like a boy. People in her old church take her to the side when she visits her old church to lecture her. I think she should demand to see in the Bible where it says women cannot cut their hair.
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
bible seeker's avatar

bible seeker · 507 weeks ago

Thanks Ken and Lori for all the time u spend writing this blog. I have been really enjoying it. I am a stay at home Mom with 2 precious children. I have been studying 1 Corinthians 11 I totally agree with having your head covered. V. 3 takes about it as a sign of submission to your head which is ur husbandV.5&6 say shave ur head if u don't want to cover it. V.10 the angels cannot see the heart like God can so the covering is there for a sign to the angels, for the angels to give her power and protect her. V.15 "her hair is given to her for a covering" please study this part everywhere I looked it says the hair is given to be covered with something not just to cover the head.
2 replies · active 507 weeks ago
Without having read down to who wrote the article, and without having ever seen the quote before reading it here, I knew immediately that it was written by Rachel Held Evans. It sounds like her, and I know that because I did bother to read her book, A Year of Biblical Womanhood after stumbling upon it in the library. Yeah, that's her standard position on anything having to do with calling sin what it is.

These assertions are all built on a faulty premise because the vast majority of the things mentioned (and the things Mrs. Evans did during her year of living "Biblical" were OT laws given specifically to the descendants of Abraham with a smattering of NT things thrown in for good measure (such as calling her husband "Lord').

The NT makes it more than clear that we are not nor can we be justified by the works of the law. Jesus came to offer grace to us in our frailty as we surrender our wills to His in faith, not in perfection.

As for the head coverings, I for one wish that they were still standard practice in the church. In the church of my youth (I came of age in the mid-late 80's,) women routinely wore hats to church. You occasionally see older women in our church wear white and white hats on the Sundays that we take communion, but that's it nowadays. If my husband wasn't opposed to my wearing head coverings, I would gladly wear them as I think that we have a seen a marked decrease in the submission and humility they represent in today's church women.

Great post Lori. Really well done!

-Elspeth
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
Thank you Lori :)
It is good to have you explain it so well.
Heidi x
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
Hi Lori
I have a couple of 'clashes' with RHE on her blog in past times. As you rightly say, she puts in enough truth to make her sound biblical but in fact she leads people astray. I think she called me judgemental and unloving for my views!.
The Lord will surely judge her for leading people astray.
Blessings to you as ever
Helen UK
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
Dr. Voddie Baucham talks about the 3 different types of Biblical laws in a bit more detail towards the end of his sermon here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkL3lT95vOU Lori, I think you would really like the whole thing, though. My hubby and I listened to it the other night and we think he hit the nail on the head, including his explanation of the different fallacies that individuals use when supporting gay marriage.
5 replies · active 507 weeks ago
God does not mince words when it comes to blasphemy of his Word. In Ps 5:6 David says God "will destroy those who speak falsehood" and Ps 15 is short but not very sweet to those 'vile person" we are to have contempt for... PS 15: "LORD, who may abide in Your tabernacle? Who may dwell in Your holy hill? He who walks uprightly, and works righteousness, and speaks the truth in his heart…. In whose eyes a vile person is despised [“contemned” in KJV, --to view or treat with contempt]. But he honors those who fear the LORD; He who swears to his own hurt and does not change; He who does these things shall never be moved." Those shall ascend to His hill !!!
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
Thanks, Lori. You explained the holes in RHE's argument very well. It is frustrating when those like RHE who claim to be Christian but do not have even a basic, elementary understanding of OT law vs NT law that has been taught by the Christian church for thousands of years. It scares me how many women are lead astray by her blog and books.
1 reply · active 507 weeks ago
My husband has asked me to wear a covering only at home. When I explain scripture to the children or pray. He does not require me to wear one in public. Other than instructing my children during church or answering my husbands questions during church I try to be silent. But as I do not pray for the church or explanation passages of scripture to the church there's no reason to cover my head in public. And as for women in leadership. The bible clearly states that you know your country is under a curse when you have women and children ruling over you. I generally won't read any books written by females or listen to any preachers unless my husband gives the ok. And then I make sure I discuss what is being said or written with my husband. As he is quite knowledgeable on biblical matters. Thank you Lori for bringing this to our attention.
Lady Virtue's avatar

Lady Virtue · 507 weeks ago

I'll say about Rachel Held Evans what I once said about her on another web site: since she's married, she needs to start having some babies! I believe she's in her mid-30s; she's certainly not getting any younger. If she were about the business of bearing children and guiding the house (I Timothy 5:14), she wouldn't have time to blaspheme the Lord's word in books and on her blog.
3 replies · active 507 weeks ago
As Lori points out, the most important principle Rachel Held Evans touchs on but does not then apply to her message are the words of Jesus to the woman caught in adultery to “go and sin no more.”

We all sin, and are in need of a Savior, that is a given, but we are called as Christians not to practice sin (1 John), or live in sin. To sin and repent is part of our sanctification process, but to live in continual unrepentant sin is generally the sign that one is not saved for the seed of God is not being displayed in him/her.

So how does Rachel Ruth Held condone any sins, even gluttony, for those who profess to be Believers in Christ Jesus? To be fat is not a sin, although it might show past sins, but to be in a gay marriage shows a continuous sin habit to function outside of God’s will both with marriage which God clearly says is to be “between a man and woman” and homosexual sex. Both are forbidden in the scriptures, with o exceptions, yet divorce has its exception for infidelity.

Rachel Ruth Held may be able to convince a shallow or unlearned believer that somehow one set of sins is justified by those done by others, but most of us learned quite young from our parents that just because our friend hits his sister it was not something we can do without our parents strong reaction to our own individual sins. The excuse that some churches allow divorce, gluttony, etc. is not going to stand up as any defense before a sovereign God who demands that every person stand for their own individual sins. This is why we all need a Jesus to cover our sins, straight, gay, married or single, as the proof of our salvation is our desire to walk in obedience, not excuse our sins. We are not called to live in Romans 7, but to walk in the newness of life of Romans 6 and 8. Rachel, do you understand that a true Christian struggles with sin, but no longer has the desire to stay in the mud, but to be clean and obedient?
Thank you for your ministry to women, and your courage to continue to speak the truth. May God bless you.
One more thought I had recently about head coverings. Inversely, I haven't ever seen a man talk about actions only being symbolic etc. when it comes to uncovering his head during prayer. All the men I can think of seem to not take issue with the scripture that a man shouldn't pray with his head covered. Many times men take off their hats/ball caps/etc. before they bow to pray. They seem to take the scripture at face value (even the men that preach symbolism for women take it literally for themselves).

Post a new comment

Comments by