If we know that a person denies the Trinity as T.D. Jakes does, we should not expect that that person will get much else right. When we start in the wrong place, we will get everything else wrong—much like putting the wrong button in the first hole of a shirt. We cannot expect the rest will end well. This is showing to be true with Jakes.
Christian News reports:
Megachurch leader and author T.D. Jakes says that homosexuals should attend congregations that affirm their lifestyle and that politics do not need to reflect biblical ethics, adding that his position on homosexuality is both “evolved and evolving.”
To begin, the problem is that no one should care what Jakes’s views on homosexuals are, and it is not because I think he has a bad view—no one should care what my views on homosexuals are, either. The reason is that only God’s view matters. If Jakes was looking to the Scriptures for his views, they would not be evolved and evolving. There may be nuances that color his views as he grows in knowledge and understanding, but our views of sin cannot change.
Christian News continues:
During an interview with the Huffington Post on Monday, Jakes was asked by a viewer if he believes that homosexuals and the black church can co-exist.
“Absolutely… I think it is going to be diverse from church to church. Every church has a different opinion on the issue and every gay person is different,” he replied. “And I think that to speak that the church—the black church, the white church or any kind of church you wanna call it—are all the same, is totally not true.”
Does this mean that God has created not the Church but the churches? This, even for Congregationalists, should be a scary concept. This means that each church or congregation can decide what constitutes faith and how it affects each member, regardless of what the Scriptures say.
So, then, this would make each congregation a separate determiner of truth. Each body could determine for itself what was and was not sin. If this were true, then we would not need Christ, faith, or the Church. We could simply declare our past sins to not be a sin. Anything that we did would be allowed. But worse, there is left to us no earthly authority to appeal to if our earthly government turns on its subject.
Christian News reports:
“[O]nce you get past [thinking America is a Christian nation] … Once you begin to understand that democracy—that a republic actually—is designed to be an overarching system to protect our unique nuances, then we no longer look for public policy to reflect biblical ethics,” Jakes explained.
“If we can divide—or what you would call separation of Church and State—then we can dwell together more effectively because atheists, agnostics, Jews, all types of people, Muslims, pay into the government. The government then cannot reflect one particular view over another just because we’re the dominant group of religious people in [this] country because those numbers are changing every day,” he asserted. “We need a neutralized government (emphasis mine) that protects our right to disagree with one another and agree with one another.”
Yet, the problem that no one can explain is, “Who says?” Who determines what a neutral ethic is, and how can we find this ethic? You see, someone’s ethic will be imposed upon any and all civilizations. What Jakes and every other person that holds his view are too short-sighted to see is that they are not promoting neutrality but overt humanism.
What Jakes is advocating is a return to the situation in Israel at the end of Judges. All will do what is right in their own eyes. God’s Law leaves no room for another law-giver, neutral or otherwise. Christians have to realize that there is no such thing as neutral ground. The only thing afforded the Christian in the area of ethics is idolatry or faithfulness.
Check out my book on the Law and the New Testament Church,
An Everlasting Covenant. Available at Amazon.