The hits (against Jesus and the Bible) just keep coming

It seems you never can know all the crazy “theology” that lurks out there in the interwebs. (And often I wish I didn’t know.) I noticed someone on Facebook referring to the servant in the story of Matthew 8:5-13 as being a “sex slave.” To that person making this claim, it is an important perversion of story because “Jesus heals the Centurion’s sex slave and doesn’t complain about the homosexuality.”[i] The crank further asserted that he preferred to follow “actions directly taken by Jesus” rather than any condemnation of homosexuality found elsewhere in the Bible. Yes, and many prefer to (and do) follow the “Jesus” of their own imagination rather than the Jesus of the Bible. If the Bible doesn’t support your position, just make stuff up!!

So, as I checked on this, I found this view exists beyond this one crank. The anemic argument seems to hinge on a nonsensical claim that the use of the term pais (παῖς) in the Greek to describe the servant means that the servant was a male sex slave.[ii]

Even if that were admitted for argument’s sake, it does not logically lead to the conclusion that the promoters of homosexuality need to get to – that this act of healing affirms the lifestyle of the person healed. Through healing, Jesus showed his power and his compassion, and demonstrated he was the promised Messiah. Every act of healing doesn’t mean that Jesus affirmed everything the people healed believed or practiced.

The use of the word παῖς does not suggest a sexual relationship.[iii] In the ancient Roman world there were sex slaves. However, to assume the centurion is using the servant/pais as a sex slave just because he is a servant is like assuming that an employer is using an employee as a sex slave just because he has an employee (and some employers abuse their employees), or like assuming a husband is abusing his wife, just because he has a wife (and some husbands abuse their wives). It is simply creating whatever one wants to have and believe out of whole cloth. Make-it-up-as-you-go theology won’t hold water. There are a couple of thousand years of history in which Christians have defined and regarded homosexual sex as sin.

John Byron, Professor of New Testament Studies at Ashland Theological Seminary, noted that the uses of παῖς in the Greek New Testament do not in any way suggest a homosexual relationship.

“The Greek noun pais is used in the New Testament twenty-four times and has a range of meanings that include ‘adolescent,’ ‘child,’ and ‘servant.’ … it appears numerous times and it always refers to a ‘servant.’ There are no occurrences of the term anywhere in the Bible that can be interpreted referring to the junior partner in a homosexual relationship.”[iv]

This argument – and any argument for a so-called “gay-affirming” Jesus – is an argument from silence. The advocate of this assertion must create places to insert words and meanings that do not exist in the Bible. The gospel of Jesus Christ is a message of God showing grace to sinners. It is not a message of affirming their sins, but a message that “while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” Jesus did not come to excuse sin, but he did come to seek and to save that which was lost.[v] Like God with Adam and Eve, Jesus did not wait for the lost to seek him (Romans 3:11). He went looking for them.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

John 1:29

…Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

---

[i] Such an interpretation just as much suggests that Jesus in the healing was not “complaining” about but rather was affirming the same-sex sexual abuse of a minor servant by an older master in the position of power. The logical end of such ragged theology will prove too much even for most promoters of homosexuality.
[ii] It is correct that the noun παῖς is masculine in this case (nominative, singular, masculine).
[iii] To counter such nonsensical arguments – for people willing to compare scripture with scripture, God also inspired Luke to tell the story using a different word for servant, doulos (δοῦλος). Luke 7:2-10. So the Bible revisers need to deal with that fact as well.
[iv] John Bryon, “Did Jesus Heal a Centurion’s Same-Sex Partner,” The Biblical World, August 9, 2012, https://thebiblicalworld.blogspot.com/2012/08/did-jesus-heal-centurions-same-sex.html

[v] Not specifically a healing, but when Jesus forgave the woman taken in adultery, he did not excuse the sin of adultery, but said rather, “Go, and sin no more.”

My two bits

“Jesus paid it all; and he doesn’t want my two bits. He doesn’t want anything I do, and he doesn’t want my commitment – because he’s found out I lied about that two or three times! And don’t you look at me that way, because you’ve done the same thing. Thank God tonight for a Saviour who did it all.”

J. Vernon McGee, From “The Power of the Word of God,” preached at Shadow Mountain Community Church, San Diego, California

Consolation

Charles Albert Tindley wrote the words and music of Consolation. It is also listed as “Arr. by Wm. D. Smith.” The song was copyrighted in 1909 in Soul Echoes No. 2, where it appeared as song No. 7.

For my fuller biography of Tindley, see Leave It There. Someone has written, “If Thomas A. Dorsey is the ‘Father of Gospel Music,’ then Charles Albert Tindley is the ‘Grandfather of Gospel Music.’”

1. Ye pilgrims through this vale of tears,
Come, let us cheer each other,
Amid the danger’s doubts and fear,
Let each console his brother.
Our way is often dark and hard,
Temptations all around us,
Unless we pray with one accord
They surely will confound us.

2. We see the pit where others lie,
All smitten by the Tempter,
We too shall come to grief and die,
If we to him surrender.
We’ll walk the blood-be-sprinkled way,
The road that leads to glory,
And as we go we’ll sing and pray,
And tell redemption’s story.

3. While some are shouting all the time,
Some other hearts are bleeding,
They want the heavenly peace to find
For which their souls are pleading.
Come, let us lead them through the gate,
The way of sins confessing,
The word of God will put them straight
And they will find the blessing.

4. There may be some that’s growing tired,
Because the way is tedious,
Let’s take the Book that was inspired
And tell them more ’bout Jesus.
Tell them of him who bled and died
The crucifixion story—
Who rendered justice satisfied
And then went home to glory.

5. We soon shall reach the shining shore,
And see our dear Redeemer,
Where we shall weep and sigh no more,
But praise his name forever.
Our time is short, and crosses great
And often hard to carry,
Unless we start we’ll be too late,
We’ve got no time to tarry.

6. We almost hear the happy shouts
Of saints beyond the river,
They’ve gone beyond this world of doubts,
They’re saved with God forever.
Our kindred they are in that happy throng,
O what a happy meeting,
We’ll watch and pray, it won’t be long
Before the Heavenly greeting.

Liberal infection of conservative causes

The quote below is from someone who back in the day would be sold to us as a conservative evangelical safe to follow.

There is, then, no absolute proof that our Canon is precisely the true Canon and no absolute proof that any one word of the text is precisely as God gave it. But the quest for absolute proofs, whether historical or theological, is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of history, theology, and the human mind. History is at best an approximation to truth based on an incomplete induction of facts. Theology is a fallible human attempt to co-ordinate the data of revelation.

Christ and the Bible, John William Wenham. London, Tyndale Press, 1972, p. 184.

Don’t get puffy

1 Corinthians 8:1 “…Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.”

1 Corinthians 13:4 “Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up…”

Below is an excerpt from Dustin Benge writing about the church where he grew up. It was his family church for generations, with his relatives were buried in the nearby cemetery.

“The pastor preached from the KJV, visited the sick, and called unbelievers to repentance. We sang from the Heavenly Highway Hymnbook. I heard the gospel, was saved and called to preach in this church.

“When I began theological education, I quickly became puffed up with pride thinking I knew much more than everyone in this little southern church who were not as ‘intellectual and I was.’ Many years later, I came to realize that these faithful farmers, miners, teachers, truck drivers, veterans, and homemakers genuinely loved the Lord, the gospel of Christ, their neighbors, and desired to obey the Bible faithfully.

“…we must never dismiss those who faithfully serve the Lord.”

1 Corinthians 4:2 Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.

Pastor problems

Gallup’s 2025 “Honesty and Ethics Survey” finds that the perceived “honesty and ethics” of clergy has dropped 40 points since its 1985 poll – 67% in 1985 versus 27% in 2025. I think that view combines actual problems created by clergy for themselves, and the perception of their honesty and ethics created by other factors. The latter can be seen as part of the equation because this perception varies in different demographics – for example older folks have a better perception of the honesty and ethics of clergy than younger folks do, and people with higher incomes trust clergy more than those with lower incomes.

Not that it should give much comfort, but clergy is still a more trusted group than journalists, lawyers, members of Congress, and telemarketers.

See Americans’ Trust in Pastors Hits Historic Low and Nurses Continue to Lead in Honesty and Ethics Ratings.

The History of Texas Baptists, reprise

I wrote the following several years ago, when I was thinking about the need for a true Texas Baptist Historical Society, one that was not geared toward a particular flavor of Baptists. Now that I am doing a microcosm of that with my Rusk County Baptist history, I thought it would be could to republish this (slightly edited) before writing about my work in the county.

The history of Texas Baptists is one of the great loves of my life. I do not remember exactly when it happened, but it is an ongoing affair of about fifty years. In 2019, I focused on the history of the Sabine Baptist Association, the earliest Baptist association in our area (organized 1843). I found a treasure trove of information at Baylor University’s archives (oh, sure, I wish for more).[i] As I began to understand what is there, a sad wonderment struck my mind. How long has this information lain dormant there? How many historians who mention the Sabine Baptist Association ever bothered to check these primary documents? I would love to see a new history of Texas Baptists refocused on primary documents that have previously been undiscovered or ignored. Perhaps we have long had the big picture, but the devil is in the details.

Previous histories are too partisan in outlook. What is labeled “a history of Texas Baptists” is most often “a history of my Texas Baptists.” Don’t get me wrong. There is a place and need for denominational histories. The Free Will Baptists write theirs, Missionary Baptists write theirs, the National Baptists write theirs, Primitive Baptists write theirs, Southern Baptists write theirs, and so on.[ii] The plus side includes access to records not easily obtained, and that they offer their own unique perspective and understanding of themselves, things frequently missed by “outsiders.” The minus side is that they often fail to assimilate their story into the whole of the history of Texas Baptists (and miss the insight of “outsiders”). Even the large tomes of Carroll and McBeth, in my opinion, only make meager mention of the existence of other Baptists after they move on from the earliest years.

Previous histories are too narrow in research. Hand in hand with the partisanship in history writing is its narrowness.  For example, to many historians, Daniel Parker is a wart on the nose of Texas Baptists. Mention him we must, but let’s move on. Quickly![iii] However, those who bother to check might find that Asa Wright labored in the west in the late 1830s with “missionary” Z. N. Morrell and in the east in the early 1840s with “anti-missionary” Daniel Parker – then later hooked up with “missionary” Lemuel Herrin and “anti-missionary” Isaac Reed to form the Sabine Baptist Association. Or, that Thomas Hanks was a member of the “Separate” Union Baptist Church near Nacogdoches before he was a member (and later pastor) of the “Regular” Pilgrim Baptist Church of near Elkhart.[iv] Through this narrowness, historians fail to branch out and learn all they might about the vagaries of even their own partisans.

Previous histories are too predictable in narration. Too often the same sources are used repetitively without seeking for other available and overlooked primary sources. I know one person will never find them all. Nevertheless, I can’t express how mind-numbing it has been to see the same story about the Sabine Baptist Association repeated over and over, when the writers kept checking the same old source, apparently never bothering to check the Sabine’s own sources – their minutes. This must be true (unless they were afraid or dishonest). Had they checked the available Sabine Association minutes, reporting accurately and honestly, they would not have repeated the same old sad story of the association .[v] Leon McBeth writes, “Any history of Texas Baptists must begin with Z. N. ‘Wildcat’ Morrell…”[vi] I have no particular quarrel with that. Morrell’s book is a wonderful record of one who lived the early history of Texas Baptists, from when he arrived in December 1835. On the other hand, Morrell is the source of the some of the errors on the Sabine Baptist Association. I find no evidence that he ever attended its sessions.[vii] His information is second-hand. Should not those who attended and recorded their sessions receive some priority of testimony?

What to do? Southern Baptists have written the majority of the history of the Baptists of Texas. I don’t fault them. They are the majority of Baptists in Texas. They may have the “training and necessary leisure.” However, they have frequently been sectarian while at the same time blaming sectarianism on their foes. Smaller Baptist sub-denominations then rebut with their own clannishness, and ultimately we fail to read the whole story. Future writers could learn a lesson from Albert W. Wardin in his Tennessee Baptists: A Comprehensive History, 1779-1999. The bulk of the book is about the majority party, but Wardin clearly takes an interest in all the Baptists of Tennessee. Further exacerbating the Texas problem, in my opinion, is that the main (if not only) Baptist historical society (if it even still exists) is connected to and funded by the Baptist General Convention of Texas. Even though they don’t/didn’t restrict their membership to BGCT folks, others often feel restricted by the integral connection. Creating an historical society not connected to or dependent upon a particular association, conference, or convention might reflect the greater diversity of Baptists in the state, create greater buy-in of Baptists across the state, and promote the kind of research that sees the connectivity of early Texas Baptists of various “stripes.” Such a society would allow historical corroboration without compromising denominational connections. I have no problems wrestling with you over faith and practice while uniting with you to better understand our history. What about you?

Maybe one day we will have an integrated account of all Texas Baptists.

That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it.

---

[i] The Texas Collection “is Baylor University’s oldest special collections library.”

[ii] Some Texas Baptist denominational histories include A History of Texas Baptists: Comprising a Detailed Account of Their Activities, Their Progress and Their Achievements, James Milton Carroll, Dallas, TX: Baptist Standard Publishing Co., 1923; A History of the Primitive Baptists of Texas, Oklahoma and Indian Territories, Joseph Sylvester Newman, Tioga, TX: Baptist Trumpet, 1906; From the Red to the Rio Grande: a History of the Free Will Baptist in Texas, 1876 to 2014, Thurmon Murphy, Columbus, OH: FWB Publications, 2017; History of the Baptist Missionary Association of Texas, William Henry Parks, Cleburne, TX: [n.d., before 1916], Missionary Baptists in Texas, 1820-1998, Oran Heaton Griffith, Henderson, TX: History & Archives Committee of the Missionary Baptist Association of Texas, 1999; Texas Baptists: a Sesquicentennial History, Harry Leon McBeth, Dallas, TX: Baptistway Press, 1998.

[iii] As does Baker in The Blossoming Desert, p. 26.

[iv] And [1] Deacon William Sparks was a member of the “Regular” Hopewell Baptist Church in Cooks Settlement (Nacogdoches County) before he was a member of the “Separate” Union Baptist Church. [2] William Brittain had been an ordained Elder nearly 30 years (ordained 1810) before he came to Texas. William and Rosanna moved from North Carolina to Arkansas, then they moved to Texas in 1837. They were first connected with the Pilgrim Church of Parker, with which church they united in 1838. They organized a church in Shelby County in 1841, then reorganized it in 1846 after splitting with the Parker churches. At this time they began to fellowship with Isaac Reed and the Sabine Baptist Association. While likely not called Missionary Baptist in the lifetime of Elder Brittain, they would come to be recognized as such.

[v] This is not to say that they got it all wrong, but that the minutes would have corrected what they did have wrong.

[vi] Texas Baptists: a Sesquicentennial History, p. 495

[vii] Z. N. Morrell does not say he did, neither is he mentioned in any of the existing minutes. On the other hand, Morrell does say he was informed on the subject by David Lewis (pp. 263-264). Though Morrell probably did not know, we have enough information today to know that Lewis was both a scoundrel and a primary cause of dissension in the association.

Resurrection hope in the Old Testament

The forces of death are visible and active in this fallen world.

We should allow the Bible’s depictions of death to influence how we think about the problem of death in this world. Interpreters may not see how resurrection hope is present in some passages if they haven’t noticed how death is present in other passages.

The outworking of death takes manifold forms. Whatever inhibits, harms, or destroys life is a kind of death. When the biblical authors tell of God’s power that restores, frees, heals, or raises, you are reading about the power of life overcoming the forces of death. The reason resurrection hope is more prevalent in Scripture than it may first seem is because the promises and actions of the God of life pervade the testimony of the biblical authors.

Mitchell L. Chase, Resurrection Hope Is More Prevalent in the Old Testament Than It May First Seem