As a parent I can only guess at what he went through and the tough decisions he had to struggle with. As a called out child of Christ I know what my stance would be in that situation.
I do not know what went on behind closed doors for this singer, nor do I know how much of the statements made are for public relations purposes. Let's face it, anyone that makes their living off catering to other people, entertaining them, keeping them happy in order to keep their own status elevated, would take public relations into account when they gave their response. Whatever their private response was, they would always have the public to consider when responding publicly.
I knew nothing of any of this until my husband made me aware of it. He took the same stance I thought, I would love my child despite their sin but I could not be a part of, or condone the sin. I just couldn't.
I was faced with that very situation a few years ago. A young woman, not my daughter but a relative that I helped raise in her younger years, was caught up in the same sin. I still loved her, welcomed her in my home, but I could not embrace the sin she was caught up in and would not allow even the tiniest hint of that sin inside my home. I just couldn't do it. Thankfully she respected me enough to never even try to engage in any form of that sin in my home or when she was with me. One of these days I really should thank her for that.
So I can somewhat understand what this dad faced. It is a rough situation to be in, strictly speaking in human terms.
What do we do when those we love most do things that go against not only our own deeply held beliefs but our Lord's commandments?
There is no question in my mind. I have to stick to my Lord's commandments. I can look the other way and love my child despite their sin so long as they know never to parade that sin before me or bring it into my home. My husband says the same thing.
This morning he told me how he would warn them of their sin and love them anyway but never allow them to bring their sin into our home. He also said he would do, has done, the same thing to relatives whose sin is lying, covetousness, etc.
There is a line that has already been drawn in the sand. A line that does not have its roots in man but in God. The line cannot be erased. It cannot be moved. Sin is sin and it is an abomination before a holy God.
I'd like to be able to say this singer took the right stand, chose the right side. I'd like to be able to say that he admonished his daughter then told her he would love her despite her sin. I'd like to be able to say that but I can't.
The public stance he took was to move the line in the sand.
This morning my husband told me of this singers situation and the stance he took. We talked of it, of why the stance was wrong, of what we'd do in that situation.
Parenting is hard. Sometimes the deep love we hold for our children is our own worst enemy. My heart hurts just thinking about being presented with such a situation. But there is that line in the sand. Whose side does anyone claiming Christ take?
After my husband and I ended our conversation I did a bit of my own research. Sure enough, there was article after article about this singer and his daughter. And each one said the same thing. He had decided to love her. The rest was her choice.
I did find one article that said he had struggled with his deeply ingrained, long held, beliefs and changed his beliefs, coming to the conclusion that it was his daughters choice.
He moved the line in the sand. He shifted it around. He chose familial relationships over the Lord and His word.
One of the articles I looked at said he was the poster boy for 'Christian' music. Where then is his stand for the Christ he claims to worship?
Honestly, after reading over several different news articles I couldn't find that stance. He took the middle road. I can't see that he didn't take a stand against sin, he may have but if he did it was done behind closed doors and not released to the public. His statements are kind of...empty, for lack of a better word. To me anyway. He wound up saying his job was simply to love his daughter. The rest is her choice.
He's right. And he's wrong.
We are given the task to love others but we are also given the task to admonish them when they sin. I can't see that this man did that. He may have, but again, if he did, it was behind closed doors.
I tried hard to find articles giving more information. There appear to be none. I tried hard to find any 'Christian' news site, magazine, or anything else admonishing him on his stance. There appear to be none of those either.
What I didn't find was disturbing. Where are the 'Christians' admonishing him to stand for Christ and not for familial relationships. Yes, love your daughter. Yes, issue a statement that you will love her no matter what. BUT issue that statement in a way that shows you don't condone her sin. Let the world know you stand for what your God stands for.
I also found something else. Something that was the most alarming of all. Something that made me sit back and stare in shock, made me question my own thoughts of wanting to give this man any benefit of the doubt.
I found what appeared to be a homosexual news outlet that was applauding him for the stance he took. It even said, "But, thankfully, he overcame the intolerant teachings which he had previously accepted."
So Christianity and taking a stand for Christ is intolerant teachings. Not only that but this news outlet applauded the fact that this singer was able to "overcome" those teachings.
I may not have been able to get a clear understanding of how this man really felt. Maybe he was against his daughters sin, maybe he spoke to her about it, I don't know. What I do know was that his statements to the public were wishy-washy and when he could have taken a stand for Christ and against sin, he did not do so. In fact he failed to so to the point that a homosexual news outlet lauded him for his stance.
I have to ask...if the homosexual community is happy with his response...Is God?
If those living in the same sin he was faced with are happy with his response...did he take the 'Christian' stance? The Scriptural stance? Or the socially acceptable stance?
In one article I did see verses on love quoted, included the verse about Christ loving us so much he laid down his life for us, but I'm not certain if it was the article's author quoting them or the singer. Either way, the verses were taken out of context and Christ does not love those glorifying sin. He does not love those wallowing in it. And I'm pretty sure He isn't happy with any professing 'Christian' taking the wishy-washy road and downplaying the severity of the sin simply because the sinner is his daughter.
Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matthew 10:37
Love your daughter, yes, please, show them all the love you can. Tell them many times a day that you love them, hug them, hold them...LOVE them with everything in your earthly heart but do so as the Christ following person you claim to be. When you align yourself with Christ...stand for him.
This man is held aloft for his 'Christian' faith. He and his wife were put on pedestals for their faith in super trying times. They were made paragons of the 'Christian's faith. They were turned into idols for what they stood for. And what they stood for is fine. They spread the name of Christ.
I am sure there are people out there that would have held Christ in total disdain had they not seen some 'star' as being a 'Christian'. But where is that testimony now? Where is this man in his alignment with Christ?
Nowhere.
He may have gotten far in the 'God loves everybody' circle of 'Christians'. He may have gained popularity, and I am sure he did gain popularity...I can't find a single 'Christian' site calling him out for his support of sin...but he did not stand for Christ. He did not call sin sin. He did not say this is an abomination to my Lord. He did not say, I am human, my human heart loves my daughter but what sayeth the Lord.
This award winning paragon of 'Christianity' is now a much heralded man of the homosexual community, at least according to one news site.
What kind of 'Christian' is he?
Please, don't get me wrong, I've heard his music and for the most part I liked it. I appreciate that he, and others, have released hymns and gospel music. Sometimes my believers heart wants to hear a song about my Lord. I don't listen to gospel music on a regular basis. I don't even listen to hymns on a regular basis but once in a while I want to hear a song and when I do I appreciate someone with better singing skills than I taking the time to share their ability with me. I appreciate it even more if the singers stance is at least deeply sincere.
I have heard this man's music. I enjoy listening to it once in a rare while. I appreciate his singing style and at least some of his song choices.
I'm not opposed to him in any way. And until now I would have said that I wasn't really for or against him but if pressed would have to fall on the 'for' side of things. He obviously loves money, makes his living peddling Christ just as much as any preacher ever did. I don't know if he gives his money to the poor, don't know if he has expensive belongings but I would assume he does.
That is neither here nor there. It simply is. If pressed I would have said I have nothing against him and support his public stance for Christ.
The trouble is that stance just fell. When his daughter and her sin pressed up against his faith in Christ...Christ lost. He chose to support and promote sin rather than take a stance against it.
He chose 'love' over Christ. Is love not the very definition of support, acceptance, and promotion the homosexual community flaunts before all? Is 'love' not the very thing they seek as affirmation for their sins? Is 'love' not the end all and be all of this heinous sexual sin that is now flaunted before us as if it is something to be proud of?
I understand that he chose to 'love' his daughter. And he should have. She is his daughter. No matter what sin consumes her heart, mind and soul, she is and will always be, his daughter. Love her. Please. But don't love her in the form of loving her sin. Call her out on her sin. Show her why you, as a self professing 'Christian' can't stand for that sin. Show the world that you can't condone or promote that sin.
Stand for the Christ you claim to follow.
He has built an empire on Christ. He has built his pedestal one brick at a time singing songs that cater to 'Christians'. He built his pedestal even further when he chose to make a very painful personal experience public, sharing the pain and the joy of one of the deepest hurts we can have in this earthly life. He shared it all before millions of adoring fans, fanning the flame of his 'Christianity' for all the world to see by leaning on his faith to see him through.
Again, I have nothing against any of that. It may not have been the best, or done in the best way, but it sure wasn't the worst.
It's his latest stance that he has chosen to share with all his adoring fans, earning him further applause by the world, gaining more fanfare, that I have a problem with.
And I have a problem with all the 'Christian' news outlets, magazines, blog sites, and any other outlet that has voice for Christian anything, for not calling him out on his wrongful 'Christian' response.
This man, this 'Christian', is in as much error as his daughter, maybe more so. She at least is not professing Christ before the entire world. She has not made an entire famous reputation on Christ's name. She has not proclaimed to all who will listen that she is a 'Christian' gaining awards and recognition for her deep faith, modeling that faith before others, parading it as what a 'Christian' should strive for.
Even if he never encouraged others to have his brand of faith, the fact that he has chosen to live it out in the lime light has ensured that he is proclaiming Christ before the world.
And when push came to shove and he was confronted with his daughters sin...
He did not stand for Christ.
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ Matthew 7:21-23 esv
The verse above clearly states that not all who profess Christ are His. He says there will be 'many' that will profess 'Lord, Lord' and proclaim to have done works in his name, would not living a 'Christian' life in the lime light be considered a work? Is it now a way of doing mighty work in Christ's name?
Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning
from the beginning. 1 John 3:8 esv
If he does not stand for Christ, for Christ's definition of sin...where does he stand?
I'm glad he chose to love his daughter but shouldn't he have chosen to stand for Christ also? It wasn't an either or situation, unless his daughter made it so. He could love her while admonishing her and taking a public stance that homosexuality is sin and he cannot condone it or have it around him.
This man has no love for Christ, nor his daughter. He "loves" only himself and has failed the test that came his way. He has made his choice---money and fame---over the Lord he claims to "love" and serve, and over his own flesh and blood to allow her deception to gain and maintain control over her without giving her the Truth of the Word. He is indeed complicit in her sins, his "love" is of the worldly variety and is an insult to the One Who is LOVE to even use that word the way he does.
ReplyDeleteWhy you allow these people to go unnamed is beyond comprehension.
Hello Darrel,
DeleteThank you for visiting and for taking the time to comment. I fully agree with you on this man's stance. He should have not only privately corrected his daughter, which he may have done, we will probably never know, but he should have taken this sinfilled situation and taken a stand against such blatant sin against the Lord he claims to serve.
He had no trouble claiming God and faith, in the public eye, as Lyn pointed out, when times were tough. He 'leaned' on God and depended on Him to see him through a very painful time. And he did so publicly, capitalizing on tragedy. Regardless of what his reasons for initially making such tragedy public it had the result of elevating him in fame and bringing in more money. Now he has chosen to publicly announce his daughters sin and seems almost proud of his decision to 'love' her.
Going just a bit off the main topic, I also noticed how this daughter 'came out' just days after her stepmother's death. She took a tragic situation and turned it into one focused on her, much the way her dad did when tragedy befell his wife and therefore his entire family.
As for why I did not name him by name...I have spoken out against many people on my blog, Mcarthur, Sproul, even your own blog. It's never my intent to publicly point fingers by naming names. I generally give enough information in my posts that anyone who reads it can quickly figure out who I am speaking of, as you and Lyn did, or that they can do a quick internet search to discover who I speak of. Sin should be called out and error corrected but there is a thin line between calling it out and defaming someone's character. It's not that they don't need to be called out, which I have done on several different people and topics, or named by name, it's that I choose not to be the one naming them by name.
Very well said, Lyn. He was lukewarm in his reply and he did fail to warn his daughter of her sin, at least he did in the public eye.
ReplyDeleteThis man has chosen to capitalize on his hardships, gaining favor and popularity through tragedy. He weeped and the world weeped with him. I did not even know about this man, his wife, or their music, until people I knew started talking of them and sharing his story with me. I then looked them up, hearing their music for the first time. I've only heard it a handful of times since then. I have noticed the popularity he gained out of the tragedy that befell his life.
And now we see him capitalizing on his daughters 'coming out'...glorying in sin is more like it. He has now gained favor with groups of people that were once against him, his faith, and his music. Now they applaud him for the stance he took.
I'm only guessing here but I'm assuming he still considers himself a 'Christian'. Of what kind of 'Christianity' I do not know. It is obviously not serving the God of the Bible when he is able to sit there, smiling, and talk of how he simply chose to love his daughter.
That's no kind of love to hold for one's daughter. You're right...he's loving her straight to hell. He is helping her in her sin, encouraging it by not speaking against it, supporting it publicly, and failing to warn her of eternal consequences. He obviously once held at least some opposition to that form of sin but when that sin came to his family he back peddled real quick. He chose the easy way. He chose the world's way.
I, too, pray my love for my family never descends to the levels this man's did. I pray I never fail my Lord in such a way, never hold the things my Lord considers sin in any way okay, or worse approve of them.
I understand your thinking on 'not calling out names' but there is no Biblical precedent for it anywhere in Scripture. To the contrary, the precise opposite is seen over and over again. To speak the truth about someone's life and/or actions does not "defame someone's character"; they have injured their own character by their actions and words. In order to "defame someone's character" lies must be presented as truth. Libel and slander are not present when facts are in view. To hide behind this cop-out of not naming names in order to preserve the character of any human is not just disingenuous, but dangerous as well. Disingenuous because ALL the facts are not presented and dangerous because such a person can be easily lied to on other matters as well as they believe what they find convenient and pleasing rather than the whole Truth. Such a person's credibility is also called into question (why are certain facts being withheld and what else am I not being told?). The well being of those who read only the easy to be swallowed facts is on the chopping block as well for how is one truly loved when pertinent facts are withheld?
ReplyDeleteAs for CCM in general I read a few years ago that a growing majority of the "artists" are queer, some openly practicing and a few still in the closet. Would you keep silent in order to protect these mockers of God perceived character or expose them so that true believers would not become complicit in their abominations by listening to them, attending their concerts, and buying their CDs? By not naming their names are you not becoming complicit with their deeds as well? [I wish I had kept that article because it was not short on names.] Please, FoC, reconsider this stance you have taken.
Thank you, Darrel, for taking the time to comment further and to better explain your feelings on the matter. I do not feel as though my decision not to name this singer was a lie or misleading to anyone. I clearly gave enough details that a bit of research will gain anyone this man's name. I do not believe that that makes me party to his sins or misdeeds.
ReplyDeleteIn 1 Corinthians 5 Paul speaks of a man that is in an illicit relationship with his Father's wife. He did not name that man by name he gave enough information that those receiving the letter knew who he was talking about. I did the same here. I gave enough information that anyone that knows of this situation would know immediately who I spoke of and anyone unaware of who I spoke of could do a bit of research to find out.
Paul gave the instructions to the Corinthians the same as our Lord gave in Mathew 18:17 "If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, regard him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.…"
I have enough information in my post that others can figure out who I spoke of while choosing to keep my comments about his sin and not who he was. We have no access to this man so the issue here is not in calling him out and correcting him but in pointing out the error of the stance he took.
In my article I clearly stated that I can no longer consider him even a professing 'Christian' in good standing. He took the wrong side, chose to give statements that the homosexual community supported. That in itself is enough to show that he did not stand for Christ. I do not support this man and will not be supporting him. I have never listened to his music beyond a handful of times, probably less than five, definitely less than ten, and I will not be doing so now.
I do not feel it is my place to call out every so-called, or self professing, 'Christian' that lives or teaches in error. I never set out to call this one out. I wrote this post to share my thoughts on the stance he took, not on him as a person, or as a 'Christian'.
If I tried to call out every 'Christian' living or teaching in error I would do nothing but name names. We live in a world filled with unregenerate people that believe themselves to be 'Christians'. Many of those people preach, teach, or sing to the public. Their goals are not to worship Christ but to further themselves through Christ.