Thursday, May 07, 2009

The Defense of the Indefensibe Continues

“They were not ashamed, and they did not know how to blush” [Jeremiah 6:15, 8:12].

Steve Camp continues to defend the indefensible, pleading "no one is perfect" in defending Carrie Prejean. This is absolutely unacceptable.

"I humbly come to the Christian media and as a brother in need of grace everyday would kindly ask you to cease the public outcry against this gal. By her own confession of Jesus Christ being her Lord and Savior, she is our sister in the Lord - let's all treat her as such." ~Steve Camp

1Jn 1:6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.

Which Jesus has she confessed? What Gospel has she proclaimed? She hasn't!

Do we accept anyone because they mouth "Lord, lord" even when they do not do the things Jesus commands?

What's sad is that he's using AW Pink about "not speaking evil against a brother" , yet it was Pink who said:

"Is it possible to be too critical of Christians (?) nowadays?" Why the qualifying "nowadays"? Has God lowered His standard—to meet these evil times? Is it permissible or expedient for me to compromise because the present generation is so lax and carnal? Do not the days in which our lot is cast, call for a clearer drawing of the line between the Church and the world? If so, should not this help to determine my conduct toward the individual?

We are mindful that large numbers hold the view that God requires less from people in degenerate times—but we know of nothing in His Word which supports them. Rather are such days the very time when the Christian most needs to show his colors, when shallowness and hollowness marks the religious profession all around, there is greater urgency for us to make manifest the reality that we are "strangers and pilgrims" in this scene. The Scriptures are just as much the Rule—and the sole rule for us to walk by—as they were for our more godly forebears. In the Day to come, we shall be judged by them as truly as they will be. It is never right to do wrong—nor to condone wrong.

If pride and haughtiness are to be reprehended; then mock humility or even an undue occupation with our own frailty and faultiness, is not to be commended. If we must wait until we are blameless, then there are many precepts of Scripture we cannot act upon. If we must tarry until our own character and conduct be faultless, then we are disqualified from rebuking anybody. We greatly fear that many have created their own difficulty or deterrent through a wrongful appropriation of those words "he who is without sin—let him first cast a stone" (John 8:7). How often have we heard professing Christians say, when it had become their manifest duty to admonish another, "Who am I—to cast stones at others?" It should be remembered, that John 8:7 was not spoken to conscientious saints, jealous of the honor of the Lord, anxious to promote the good of others—but to hypocritical pharisees, who were deliberately seeking to ensnare Christ.

Hence the force of "bearing with one another in love" (Eph 4:2); yet that must not be twisted into "winking at one another's faults" or condoning sin—under the pretense of love.

No, we cannot "always tell" whether a professing Christian is a regenerate or unregenerate person, and therefore it behooves us to be cautious and conservative, lest we be guilty of giving that which is holy—unto dogs (Matt 7:6). It is a very serious and solemn matter to encourage a deluded soul in his deception, as we do when we lead him to believe that we regard him as a Christian. But how is this to be avoided? By a withholding the tokens of fellowship; for example, refusing to address as "Brother" or "Sister" —from all whom we stand in doubt of, especially from those whose walk is manifestly worldly and contrary to the precepts of Scripture. While we cannot read the hearts of those we mix with—we can test their outward life by the Word, and if its general tenor is opposed to the requirements of holiness, and is contrary to the example of Christ—we certainly are not warranted in regarding them as children of God.

End quote.

I suggest Camp read this sermon, because it speaks directly to this whoe issue, which he continues to defend to the shame of the Master and His name.

Would Steve allow his daughter to get breast implants, put on a skimpy swimsuit with her cleavage hanging out, put on high heels, and gyrated her hips in a sexual fashion in front of millions of people? How about his pastor's wife doing that?

Would he? Or are the rules different for different people?

Is the COMMAND for modesty (and don't get smart with us: we aren't talking about hair styles or make-up here--but again, are we bringing attention to ourselves? See 1Tim.2), an option? If it is, then so is the command for elders to be male. Its that clear and that much of a command. Then again, so is the command for mothers to stay home to raise their own children.

We are NOT to tolerate promiscuous behavior as "Christ-honoring" because its not.

We are not to wink at sin and say we're loving the person: because we aren't.

There was not one wit of difference between Prejean and the other women on that stage. They all were gyrating their hips and shaking their chests at the men in the audience on tv. Wow, now THAT'S for the glory of God! Right? Folks, figure this out: she was not in that body competition for the glory of the Master. She never claimed such a thing. She can't. The world's view of beauty, which she fell for, is NOT God's view of beauty. This is basic Christianity 101.

But when you befriend a foul-mouthed, gutter speaking "pastor" and soften your mere "disagreement" with him, of course you'll also defend a naked body.

Why doesn't Camp tell Prejean to cease from dressing like a sexually promiscuous woman? We aren't the wrong ones here. At least Paul Proctor finally saw that. Too bad Steve's got his head in the sand. I find it interesting this defense of Miss California comes off the heels of his backing down on cussing garbage mouth Driscoll though.

Sissyfication continues to grow in "solid Christian" circles. Rare is the man that has a backbone on truth and biblical PRACTICE. Everything's optional now: from the Genesis account, to divorce, to remarriage, to impurity, to the sole authority of Scripture, to absolute Truth, to women being in leadership and men actually qualifying for leadership, to wives working outside the home while they have children to raise, to the doctrine of God and salvation. Its all up for grabs.

And why does Camp defend the woman who has been caught lying on her application on the MORALITY CLAUSE no less...not to mention getting naked and semi-naked in front of the camera? Because lying is justified.

And I'll ASK AGAIN UNTIL SOMEONE ANSWERS ME: What gospel has Prejean proclaimed? She did not proclaim Christ on that stage. She did not proclaim Christ in her interviews. She proclaimed herself as a martyr for "free speech". She has yet, to my knowledge, and I've been following this story for days now, proclaim the GOSPEL. And her "stand" on stage was not bold ("my OPINION" isn't Truth--opinions you can take or leave but TRUTH is never optional) and did not reveal faith in Christ Jesus. What she said was what a Mormon would've said. She did NOT bring Christ nor Scripture into her answer. She continues to call it "my opinion".

So as Pink rightly points out, because so does Scripture,: why are people so quick to accept a person as a Christian? Because they say they are? Mormons say they are. Catholics say they are. Many Universalists say they are. JW's say they are. We are to TEST all things. Prejean has not given any evidence that she is saved. Rather she's done just the opposite: she has slapped HIS precious name onto sensual impurity.

Where's the anger over that?

I guess if you can slap the name of Jesus Christ onto cussing and sexual talk and x-rated websites, and pride and arrogance and gutter talk, then you can pretty much slap HIS name onto anything. Even strip teasing and homosexuality.

Gal 6:7 Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap.

I would call on Steve Camp to stop justifying sensuality in the name of Christ and quit trying to lower the bar of godly living.

No comments: