Let’s Be Picky

Jul 2, 2016 | 7 comments

Two years ago, this wonderful post made its rounds through my newsfeed. Though not offended by a Thoreau Walden reference to support her thesis, her discussion of gratitude is markedly void of any Scripture reference. This made me curious, as her conclusion was “reject what the world says is good, and be thankful for what you have.” It’s a great discussion of contentment, and as its slightly sarcastic, it really spoke to me—she was speaking my language. All of the women sharing her post in my news feed were solid biblicists, women of the faith that I look up to. Women farther along in their walks than I. Women I greatly respect.

I decided I need to know more about Glennon Doyle Melton, and so I went perusing. What I found was this post, in which she reveals herself to be a pantheist (every person is a god, or divine). She’s not only comfortable with pantheism, she is super comfortable twisting Scripture, denounces the inerrancy of the Bible, and her call is for Christians to embrace homosexuality because who even knows what the Bible means by God’s law anyway? Melton is a crusader for transgender rights and women in the pulpit. Melton does not believe we can really know what God wants us to believe today because the Scriptures are not infallible. Melton is all about the postmodern idea of “love”.

In short, Melton has no idea who the God of the Bible is, and if she did, she’s pretty sure she wouldn’t like Him.

Needless to say, I didn’t share Melton’s post about gratitude. Melton has never met the God of the Bible and while she may have written an excellent piece on valuing children over material goods, she’s not just “off” in her teaching on Scripture, she’s heretical. She repudiates God’s law and she rejects Biblical doctrine in favor of the world’s brand of secular “love”. Not only should she not be shared, she does not represent Biblical thinking.

I’ve been asked before what my thoughts are regarding Jen Hatmaker. At the time, I knew little about her, because the little I had read was pleasant enough, but lacked Biblical substance. I just wasn’t pulled to her type of fluffy rhetoric and simply kept scrolling. She has some nice mom-sentiments. You know, the kind where she exhorts moms to stop trying to “do it all”. I get that. I have always tried to balance my mom-of-small-children life with a work-from-home life. It’s a tough season. Still, when you claim Christianity, you must be more than a motivational speaker, and her lack of commitment to preaching the Gospel over preaching the “it’s okay, we all are just trying!” gospel should’ve been a big enough sign. Of course, now she’s come full out for the “LGBT community” and had a lot to say about how Christians committed to a biblical worldview had something to do with the shootings in Orlando. If we didn’t wise up after her comments regarding how awesome the Pope is last fall, I hope we have by now. (Side note: ever notice how those who are NOT committed to the sufficiency and authority of Scripture end up being the first to cave on homosexuality as a sin?)

All this to say, it’s happening again. Ann Voskamp wrote this truly moving post that ripped my mom-heart out and stamped it on the floor. Y’all. It’s good. Having this post fresh in my mind might be why it’s taken me 90 minutes to write as little as I have of this blog so far because my three year old wanted a back rub and a song and a snuggle and some more strawberries and a new water cup and whoops she spilled her water and she wants to take a bath and she can’t find that one Elsa dress she wants to wear, NO NOT THAT ONE, THE OTHER ONE. But it’s okay, because I need to give her my chest feathers or something.

Look, here’s the deal, Voskamp can be solid, but she can also be downright way-off-base. She owns a brand of Catholic-influenced mysticism that can be nothing short of dangerous. Her discussion of her sexual ecstasy in her relationship with God crosses the line of appropriate: “God makes love with grace upon grace, every moment a making of His love for us. [C]ouldn’t I make love to God, making every moment love for Him? To know Him the way Adam knew Eve. Spirit skin to spirit skin?” In fact, she had to go on somewhat of a pilgrimage to a Roman Catholic temple to have this “experience” with God. This is a grave misunderstanding of how the Gospel plays out in our day-to-day lives and the fact that Roman Catholic temples are not, as she calls them, “holy ground.”

So much can be written on this subject. What is discernment? What are the rules of “sharing” a post? Should we care if someone is wrong in their theology but right on a few things? What’s the difference between being right and almost-right? I’ve been thinking about this for ages. And as women I adore and love and I know are solid and seeking to honor God in all things share posts by the likes of Voskamp, I have to wonder why my conscience won’t let me, even if I heartily agree with some of the things she has to say. And of course, in our social media age, we all may not agree on what sharing an article on your page must mean. Does it mean you agree with *everything* that is said on someone’s entire website? Is that even possible to do? Why should we care?

This one thing keeps swirling around in my head: we can afford to be picky. More than that, let’s be picky. Proverbs describes wisdom and discretion as a safety net in Proverbs 3. Let’s not compromise on right and almost-right. Wrong, but sometimes not wrong. Let’s not usher Voskamp out of the kingdom (far from it!) but let’s not give an audience to teachings with so much potential danger. There’s too much Elliot and Byrd and Schaefer and Ryle and Spurgeon to read.

 

SUBSCRIBE TO THE

SHEOLOGIANS NEWSLETTER!