I suggested that, as a law student, it may interest her to examine the use of the word “condemn” from a legal perspective. Seldom is the word used to describe a person who has been sentenced to a fine, community service, or a moderate prison term. Rather, it seems the word is typically reserved for those who have been “condemned” to a life of imprisonment or execution, the most severe sanctions a state can impose.
This raises interesting questions for this conversation, such as how Jesus used words such as judge or condemn and what implications this may have for his followers. To be clear, etymology should not be mistaken for theology, but perhaps examining how our culture understands (or misunderstands) the words of Jesus could prove useful.
A COMMON EXAMPLE in Scripture is the Pericope Adulterae, or the story of Jesus forgiving the adulterous woman (John 7:53-8:11). Interestingly, while this may be one of the most quoted passages in Scripture, it is commonly disputed by biblical scholars and was not likely part of the original text. Authenticity aside, few other passages have shaped the American understanding of Jesus more than this story.
It tells of religious leaders who brought a woman caught in the very act of adultery to Jesus. They asked if she should be stoned, in accordance with their law, hoping to ensnare Jesus in an ethical trap. Jesus replied by asserting that “he who is without sin should cast the first stone.” One by one, from the oldest to youngest, each man departed until only Jesus and the woman remained. Jesus asked the woman, “has no one condemned you” [italics added for emphasis], to which she replied “no one.”
The final verse of this passage is rich with nuance and meaning. Jesus then said to the woman “neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more.”
A PLAIN READING of the text suggests that Jesus’ use of the word “condemn” closely resembles the aforementioned description, that is to say, none of the woman’s accusers chose to execute her. The text does not suggest that he neglected to judge her behavior as sinful.
Rather, he acknowledged the sinfulness of her behavior and instructed her to change course. Several other passages describe Jesus’ remarkable ability to both directly and winsomely confront sin, including his encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4 and the immoral woman who washed his feet in Luke 7.
Conversely, the contemporary understanding, heavily influenced by the new tolerance (see my previous article), seemingly perceives any effort to describe a particular behavior as sinful as a call to take up stones.
Paul the Apostle would later instruct Corinthian believers to judge their fellow members (1 Cor. 5:12-13). He asserted that, while God will judge the unbeliever, it is the responsibility of the church to confront sin within its membership.
The notion of church discipline is a difficult one. It has sadly been practiced in ways that are selfish and unloving far too often.
HOWEVER, it is the responsibility of the church. It may be fair to say that a church that does not judge its membership (albeit, patiently and graciously) is not a church. It may be a community-gathering place, a platform for philanthropy and civic engagement, or a catalyst for change and social justice. It may function as a performing arts center, relief agency, or community-building organization. It may be any number of good things- but without the careful discernment of fellow believers rightly judging those within its membership and holding one another accountable, it is not a church.
Perhaps this explains some of the public reaction to the document at Shorter. In a cultural milieu where everyone is considered the master of his or her own morality, when efforts to describe a particular behavior as sinful are perceived as a visceral condemnation of a person’s humanity, and where even the church cannot hold its own membership accountable to its shared values, an educational institution that informs its practices with a traditional view of these passages will be deemed intolerable.
MY HOPE is that Shorter community, as they remain steadfast in their belief and practices, will be able to spur on a more robust and multi-dimensional understanding of Christ, his church, and our relationship to one another as fellow believers.
Joshua Arnold currently serves as the Director of Residence Life and Student Conduct at Shorter University. His previously published article, “Shorter University and the Trouble with Tolerance” and other writings can be found at jarnoldcr.wordpress.com.
You and I know that we are not going to agree on this issue. But, may I ask a favor of both you and the administration? For Pete's sake, would you please STOP turning the firehose on and telling us it's raining outside.
Once again, I am going to remind you, Dowless and Price (none of whom ever attended Shorter College) and everyone else who thinks that Shorter was on some wayward path of debauchery; that Shorter has always been a Christian college. It has always been run by Godly men. Would the administration PLEASE be at least honest enough to say they want Shorter to be strictly a Fundamentalist Georgia Baptist Bible College, and that Christianity has nothing to do it. Or do they think that wrapping up their plans in a nice, tidy bow under the guise of being on a good Christian mission will hide their master plan?
While that would be a bitter pill to try to get us to swallow, it would at least be honest. It would also be honest, if the GBC and the administration would come right out and say what the rest of us know they appear to believe, that only those who have the exact same beliefs as they do are worthy to call themselves Christians.
Because while they proclaim differently, their mouths and their actions do not have their stories straight. Why else would faculty who attended a church of a different denomination be told that since they went to that particuliar church (which by the way, is not some made up denomination and has a beautiful sanctuary downtown) - why would these people be told to their faces by the administration - that because they attend that church, they are not Bible believing Christians. Give me a break! Please don't tell me that it didn't happen, I know for a fact that it did. Please also do not tell me that a good many Georgia Baptists do not believe this way - I know from personal experience when my husband and I left the Baptist church and joined the Presbyterain church.
This has NOTHING to do with Christianity! This has everything to do with the power and control that the old men at the GBC have over the school. They can sit on their sanctimonious high horses and judge others because they don't believe exactly as they do, but NOWHERE in the Bible are they given that right!
May I remind you that denominations within Christianity are man-made and that Christ did not come and die for our sins to make the Georgia Baptists Lord of all. There is supposed to be one certainity that runs through them all, but apparently a good many at the GBC has gotten so wrapped up in the details, they have completely missed the central message.
Now, would you like to know why the alumni are still so angry? As I was looking for a photo in the 1984 Argo, I came across a passage underneath a photo:
"Because Shorter is a Christian college, some take it for granted that its faculty and students live peaceful, unchallenging lives. We too have our share of trials; however, we have the hope of Christ and each other - we are very special people."
There in black and white - a Christian college. All with different opinions and beliefs, but under the one central truth. That is what has been taken away. And those of us who know you are trying to convice us it's raining - know better.
"MY HOPE is that Shorter community, as they remain steadfast in their belief and practices, will be able to spur on a more robust and multi-dimensional understanding of Christ, his church, and our relationship to one another as fellow believers."
A more multidimensional understanding of Christ? Through the policies of the GBC and it's in-house lakey by the name Donald Dowless (as well as it's ardent supporters such as yourself) you've insured that there will only be a single understanding of Christ at Shorter since you're systematically eliminating anyone who doesn't share your specific understanding of Him.
You're not fooling anyone Josh, nor is anyone else at Shorter. Religious cleansing is hardly the path to go down if you're sincerely interested in following not just the word but the principles of Christ.
Matthew 7-Jesus's own words are very very clear
Perhaps why many churches don't judge their own members and hold them accountable (a job for god from my understanding) is because of Romans 14
Paul's words to the Corinthians are not in conflict w/his admonition to the believers in Rome. In one letter he is dealing with matters of sin, in the other matters of preference. The church must discern wisely between the two in order to graciously and effectively fulfill its role.
So it's somewhat strange that you continually allude to a church in your posts in spite of Shorter not being one. Is this another example of the misrepresentation we've become accustomed to in these discussions?
Fair question. Please refer to last paragraph of article. I've quoted below for convenience.
"In a cultural milieu where...even the church cannot hold its own membership accountable to its shared values, an educational institution that informs its practices with a traditional view of these passages will be deemed intolerable."
Your comments are interesting, thoughtful and articulately expressed.
Many folks who love Shorter are dismayed by three other concerns:
* Shorter has made changes they might otherwise support in an abrupt and unkind way.
* Shorter's new administration is showing signs that, ideology aside, they are not very competent leaders, administrators or fund-raisers.
* The Georgia Baptist Convention's executives talk a good game but are ignoring both Shorter's financial threats and its administrative competence issues. I've been looking hopefully for signs they're acting decisively but just very discreetly; unfortunately now it appears they’re just asleep at the wheel.
The administration may be approaching a point where even their most loyal supporters begin seeking more stable, secure employers.
Shorter has alienated a large portion of their alumni base. Their intransigence on their position and their unwillingness to engage in the civil discourse that Mr. Arnold so often reminds us is essential, first alarmed the alumni base, then angered it, and now lines have been firmly drawn.
There is great concern not only among the alumni, but among Baptist parents and students with whom I have spoken about the quality of the replacements in faculty and staff. While it is fine to hire young professors when there are seasoned professionals on board who can guide the newly-graduated professors through the issues of pedagogy, without those professionals and without proper pedagogy, the quality of the education received at Shorter will suffer.
Dr Dowless has been on board for a year now, and not one major gift, other than the money that was already owed by the GBC to the university has been announced. Dr. Dowless is no longer welcome in the homes of some of Shorter's most significant donors.
Furthermore, the Board of Trustees seems to be entirely impotent. Not one voice has spoken to the issues of failing enrollment, the exodus of faculty or the dissatisfaction of the alumni and donors.
It is time for the Georgia Baptist Convention to stop spouting platitudes and put their money where their mouths are. If they are unwilling or unable to do so, then Shorter will surely fail - sooner rather than later, and the blame will be placed squarely where it belongs - at the feet of Robert White, the Board of Trustees and the members of the Georgia Baptist Convention.
That sure is a pesky word, "hoe." Even LMFAO (in their 'clean' version of Party Rock Anthem -- as used in the flash mob at Shorter) uses another meaning of the same word:
Where the drank? I gots to know, tight jeans, tattoo ’cause I’m rock ‘n’ roll
Half black, half white, domino, game the money, op-a-doe
Yo, I’m runnin’ through these HO’s like Drano
I got that devilish flow, rock ‘n’ roll, no halo
I'll take care to use the word correctly for sure from now on, thanks!
If you happen to have an opinion that would be normal in the 1960s then you're pretty much an outcast today.
You want a woman to be able to marry another woman? There's millions of dollars, thousands of elected officials & judges, every Hollywood celebrity and hundreds of businesses on your side. You think marriage should only be reserved for a man and a woman? You're a bigoted crazy person.
You want people to be ranked by ability without consideration for their race or gender? You are obviously a racist or sexist. You want people to be ranked by their ability and then extra points given based on race and gender? You have now taken the position of the enlightened majority, congrats.
This position taken by Shorter, Chic Fil A, etc is going to be a niche economy. They are basically saying "Yea, we understand that we are in the majority, but we're going to take the wild position of discriminating against those who believe white people should be able to marry yellow cats, but we think that 1% who agrees with us will be enough of a clientele to keep our business afloat".
We will see more and more of this as our country becomes more divided. You can get a burger at the restaurant who refuses to make a statement, or you can get a burger at the restaurant who feels the way you do about abortion. Your choice.
Here is the situation, You and I could totally get into a battle of the Scriptures. In other words, I could turn around and quote you scriptures that would disagree with those that you have quoted, Just as an example Jesus warned us to look at the log in our own eye long before judging others. However, that is going to nothing to change the situation at Shorter. The reality is the administration has run off faithful long time faculty and staff, hurt the University's reputation, has caused discord in with in the Shorter family and more importantly has caused damage to the Cross of Christ. It is my understanding fall enrollment projections are down and for a institution who financial income is tuition driven that does not look good for the University's financial future. What has been done at Shorter has been done in an anything but Christ like manner. You and others on 'The Hill" can quote all the Scripture you want but actions speak louder than words.
Thanks for the feedback. I'm sure I would enjoy a lively conversation with you! I would gently submit that the passage you've chosen is perhaps another great example of how we view the actions at Shorter through a lens of what is "Christ-like" that has been informed by culture and not Scripture. Most know Jesus' famous words about calling out the "speck" in our brother's eye, while ignoring the "plank" in our own. It is a clever hyperbole, and a testimony to the humor and winsomeness of Christ. We seldom, however, quote the verse in its whole context. Jesus encourages his followers to "first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye" (Matthew 7:5). While the passage warns against judging others hypocritically, it does affirm the role of believers rightly holding one another accountable, as described in my article.
You made my point inadvertently. The New administration judged anyone who didn't agree with the Baptist faith and message unacceptable to work at Shorter. Therefore, doing exactly as Christ warned us not to do. However, the concern I have is truly for Shorter's future and the damage that has been done not the merits of the lifestyle statements. I pray that they will see the error of how they have treated others and the healing can begin within the University community.
Shorter University has not required faculty and staff to sign the Baptist Faith and Message, as other Georgia baptist colleges have. The faith statement at Shorter is a broadly evangelical document, not dissimilar to other comparable Christian, evangelical colleges and universities. Folks must make up their own minds whether Shorter has "judged" others or not. From my understanding of Jesus' words, as described in my article, I am not inclined to believe so...but can appreciate how others might not share my view. It does not seem unreasonable to me that a religious university would have religious requirements distinct to their own tradition. An Arminian, for example, would have a very difficult time getting hired at a Reformed (Calvinist) university. This doesn't mean that they have "judged" the Christianity of their Calvinist friends as inferior. Rather, they simply realize that their differences do not make them the best colleagues to be pursuing a shared mission together.
Your heroes haven't cleansed the whole hill, and you'll obviously be gone to a different RA job in a couple of years, but for those who devoted 30 or 40 years to Shorter, your brand of isolationist Christianity and the evil behind it are not welcome here. Face it, you don't belong in Rome, and you and your spiritual brethren will never be accepted here. Being stupid entitles you to believe you're on the right side of things. Gosh, it must be nice to be stupid. The world is only 6,000 years old, huh? LOL!!
I disagree with ShorterProf's comments that were directed at you personally; they were are overly harsh.
Moving beyond that, though, his comments about Sallie Samples, Debra Faust and Craig Shull mirror the frustration and bewilderment in the community among others that might otherwise be Dowless supporters. Nobody really understands why the administration did what they did to these people; it wasn't theological -- it just looks petty and inept.
Thank you for your generous words. I've always thought that if we all modeling your graciousness in disagreement, these conversations could be quite productive. Sorry for not responding to your previous comments. While thoughtful and certainly worth conversation...they were beyond the scope of this particular article.
Sadly, I wish I had an answer for you in regard to your question. I've not got the impression that Dr. Dowless has avoided conversations, as others have suggested. To the contrary, I've heard him invite others to share their concerns with him on several occasions. My own personal interactions with him have been nothing but positive. I trust his leadership because I know him. Perhaps if others did as well, it would prove more difficult to throw barbs from afar.
Shorter Prof, my heart is continually grieved for you. Clearly, your hurt runs deep. I've written extensively about the intolerance of the new tolerance, and I'm saddened by how adeptly you've illustrated this.
In the Baptist tradition, who has the authority to say which church’s interpretation of Scripture is the correct one?
Am I to be removed from the Southern Baptist Convention, asked to resign my position in the local church because my interpretations of the disputed Pauline letters, specifically concerning homosexuality, differs from those of prominent Baptist leaders? And will my wish to give to the cooperative fund to further the Kingdom of God throughout the earth be rejected, because of these same beliefs? Sadly, I have seen these last few answers turn out to be a resounding, and uncompromising, “Yes” in many similar circumstances.
Mr. Arnold does not write in ignorance of the fact that the Church has, many times, failed in its task to lovingly correct one another in the spirit of Jesus Christ. If we realize our shortcomings in these endeavors, why do we continue to give authority in our Baptist churches to those who perpetuate these offences? If Jesus’ correction served, not to divide, but to build community, where have we strayed from His example?
In our rich tradition as Baptists, we give great respect to each individual in the church, as well as to his or her ability to speak on behalf of God, according to God’s personal revelation to that individual. We are all a holy priesthood. As perception, culture, understanding, and tradition has evolved, so has our Baptist church. Language that was once considered to be profaning God’s Holy and Precious Name is now said commonly, even from our pulpits on Sunday mornings. Who determines which changes are permitted, and which are to be condemned?
I do not have answers to these questions. But I do know that I have direct communication to God, the Father, through His perfect Son. And I have prayerfully considered all that is happening on the Hill. I am confident that God is not in it. The leadership says they are confident that God IS with them. The very fact that we have reached a crossroad such as this is the beauty of the Baptist faith, as surely as it is the cause of much division and strife in that same church. However, simply recognizing that these questions are valid and worthy of discussion will start us down the path of discernment as to what is God’s will, His good, pleasing and perfect will.
Thanks for your kind words. I've enjoyed reading your articles as well. I would love to meet in person one day. As iron sharpens iron, so to speak...I'm sure we would have much to learn from one another. Unfortunately, I cannot answer your question in regard to how to operationalize church discipline within the Baptist tradition...as it is not my formative experience. In the context I'm familiar with, it would be exercised by the eldership of the church. Paul dedicated much ink to refuting false teachings. I must presume that these teachers also had access to direct communication to God, through the Son, and the apostles teachings (as witnesses of the resurrection of Christ). Not only did he exercise church discipline himself (the aforementioned passage is specifically dealing with sexual immorality), but strongly encouraged the lay leaders and brethren of the churches in Corinth to follow his example. I'm deeply saddened by the cases of church discipline that have been driven by selfishness and fear, rather than love and compassionate concern. However, I am encouraged by examples of church discipline that have served all involved well, and I think that the literature is ripe with healthy examples and models. I'm concerned that abandoning this responsibility of the church for fear that it may not be done well would have much more grave implications for the church. Furthermore, if the purpose of church membership is NOT submitting ourselves to the accountability of the eldership and church community...I would be admittedly at a loss as to what the purpose would be, outside of some of the functions I described in my article.