Rachel Held Evans Dead

[Szdfan]

Rachel Held Evans died this morning. She had gone to the hospital several days ago due to an infection which led to brain swelling.

I know RHE is not popular in these parts, but she was a huge influence in progressive evangelical circles. She was 37. I’m in shock.

https://slate.com/human-interest/2019/0 ... ssion=true

[Admiral Acbon]

As a Facebook friend of mine said (as best I remember it)- "Praise that her tongue is silenced; mourn for the soul that is lost."

[Szdfan]

As a Facebook friend of mine said (as best I remember it)- "Praise that her tongue is silenced; mourn for the soul that is lost."

I think that’s an awful thing to say

[JohnHurt]

Here is an article that Rachel Held Evans wrote:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/3 ... eneration/

Rachel said in this article that getting people in church is more important than opposing gay marriage. She claims that evangelicals are waging war against the gay and lesbian lifestyle, which is affecting church attendance.

One paragraph she wrote reads:

"Whether it’s over the denial of evolutionary science, continued opposition to gender equality in the church, an unhealthy alliance between religion and politics or the obsession with opposing gay marriage, evangelicalism is losing a generation to the culture wars."

She believes in evolutionary "science", gender equality in church, etc. She wrote a book about growing up in "Monkey Town" which is Dayton Tennessee where the Scopes trial on banning the theory of evolution in schools was held.


This is Rachel and her husband, Dan. If you don't see a problem with this picture, message me.

I have a hard time believing this woman was from rural Tennessee, but I find it easy to understand why CNN and all of the big liberal media are lamenting her passing. She is one of them, or was. Now she is something else.

It is sad to see someone go down the wrong path, but even worse when they have a large amount of influence over other people. I hope God has mercy on her soul, but I am grateful to God that her influence in these matters is over.

[Robert]

While being at odds with her positions, we should be compassionate to her family and friends who grieve their loss.

[bible]eph 4,29[/bible]

[Szdfan]

While being at odds with her positions, we should be compassionate to her family and friends who grieve their loss.

Russell Moore - a frequent critic of RHE - tweeted the following in response to her death:

I am shocked and broken-hearted to hear of the death of @rachelheldevans . Please stop right now and pray for this young family.

And

. @rachelheldevans leaves behind a husband and two small children, one 3 and one less than one year old. As many as can, let’s please help this grieving young family with the overwhelming medical bills:

Matt Walsh tweeted:

Rachel Held Evans was a critic of mine and I was a critic of hers, but her death is a shocking tragedy and I mourn it. Praying today for her husband and children. She was only 37. Life is a fragile and precious thing, and far too short for so many.

Walsh also responded to some of the same type of schadenfreude exhibited here. A twitter account for “Reformation Charlotte” tweeted:

Rachel Held Evans died today. While we shouldn't take pleasure in the death of the wicked, she can no longer actively inflict spiritual harm on people and lead them astray. God is just and right in all things. In Him, we rejoice.

Wash responded:

The only reason to tweet something like this mere hours after the mother of two children dies at the age of 37 is to advertise your own faux-piety and exploit her death for attention. It is petty and vile and it embarrasses me as a Christian.

[Valerie]

I never heard of her- this is all news to me.


How does the Lord Jesus see her life, and her death? This is what I consider.

His ways are not our ways, His thoughts are not our thoughts- but we seek to know Him, and His heart- in all things. There are times when His ways and His heart challenge & perplex me- as I read His Word & study His ways throughout time- I find myself really trying to understand-

Her life and her death seem to bring out a lot of strong feelings regarding her influence. It seems to me, this little bit I've read, that people may see her death as something God would have allowed because of her strong influence- and that perhaps that influence could have led souls astray-

It caused me to think of Revelation 2 because of the influence of Jezebel in the Church (I'm certainly not saying Rachel was a Jezebel- only that I consider Christ's warning because of the influence of Jezebel & that He would put her on a sickbed, if she did not repent)

Revelations 2: 21-23 Jesus said to the Church in Thyatira:

"Nevertheless, I have a few things against you, because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. And I gave her time to repent of her sexual immorality, and she did not repent. Indeed I will cast her into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulations, unless they repent of their deeds. I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works"

I think that a lot of people today would have a problem with what Jesus said above. It would come across as harsh, judgemental- etc-

Nonetheless- I agree that people should have compassion on her husband, children, & family and not come across as celebrating her death-

I also understand why those who love the Lord would have been extremely concerned for her influence on Christians in several areas, and I can honestly say that it seems to me, that Jesus would have been concerned with what she was teaching (as I consider what concerned Him in Rev 2 above)

If we are claiming to represent Christ in our words, teachings, influence- persuasion- and God is not pleased with that influence- would He indeed allow an early death if there is not repentance of such?
I'm just pondering this-wondering thoughts about 'early' deaths- our time here is appointed by Him- there have been servants of the Lord who died early and their lives were such that I believed the Lord just couldn't wait to receive them into His kingdom-

We always need to check our own hearts when presented with these challenges to understand.

[Josh]

While I disagreed with RHE’s doctrine strongly, I also disagree strongly with JohnHurt’s.

If I found out JohnHurt died, I hope we wouldn’t be on this forum within a week discussing how he was basically a heretic who denied the New Testament.

[Bootstrap]

I also disagree strongly with much of her doctrine. I think we need to find the same balance Jesus demonstrated, loving sinners without endorsing sin. To me, that also implies compassion for her and her family, praying for them, hoping for God's mercy, and speaking kindly of them.

And there are some things we can learn from her. I disagree with her application, but some of her concerns are very relevant to me too:



Let's not compromise on what the Bible teaches. Let's hold the line on things it calls sin. But these words are a challenge to me - how can we avoid being the kind of Pharisee Jesus spoke against? That is also sinful, and it also hurts the kingdom. If we want to condemn the people that Jesus spoke most loudly against, we should be on our guard against any hint of that.

How can we welcome people in, demonstrate the love that God has for them, and be a witness to God's love, not to our own judgementalism or legalism? How can we do that without losing our own holiness?

I reject some of the answers that Rachel Held gave us, but I accept the challenge. I also reject some approaches to holiness that seem more like the Pharisees than like Jesus, but I accept the challenge of holiness and a life of discipleship.

Let's start by praying for her and her family, without feeling we have to embrace all of her teachings.

[JohnHurt]

While I disagreed with RHE’s doctrine strongly, I also disagree strongly with JohnHurt’s.

If I found out JohnHurt died, I hope we wouldn’t be on this forum within a week discussing how he was basically a heretic who denied the New Testament.

I like you too, Josh. And I appreciate your disagreements with me.

Iron sharpens iron, and my rough edges - I hope, have made you sharper.

To get your facts straight about me...

My spiritual position is that I believe that what Christ taught is superior to any other person, church, or teaching, including what most people "think" that Paul taught.

On salvation, if Paul taught Eph 2:8-9 and Christ taught Matthew 19:16-19, I will follow Christ.

On the Law, if Paul taught Eph 2:15 and Col 2:14 and many others, and Christ taught Matt 5:17-20, I will follow Christ.

As Christ said:

John 13:16 Amen, amen I say to you: The servant is not greater than his lord; neither is the apostle greater than he that sent him. (Douay Rheims)

I don't see how following Christ as the supreme leader of Christianity is "heresy" to Christ. But many churches hold Christ's teachings in a lower position than their own. Christ warned us of this in Matthew 15:9

Christ's final instruction to us is:

(20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

He never told us to teach someone else's doctrines. Just His.

Most churches teach a religion about Christ, not the religion of Christ.

I like the Mennonites because they at least teach what Christ taught about non-violence and that we should not be building bigger barns. And that we should not worry about someone's mote in their eye, when we have our own problems. Also, if you have a pearl of wisdom, you don't have to tell them but one time, as any more will make them mad.

So, that is what I believe, and it is not correct to say that I have "denied the New Testament." You have that wrong, brother.

Rachel Evans taught against what Paul taught in Romans 1:22-32. She believed that we should accept evolutionary science, that creatures created themselves, and not as what is written in Genesis 1. In this way, she encouraged us to worship the creature more than the Creator. She said that we should not be against homosexual relationships, as Paul warned against in Romans 1:26-27.

Most Christians in the liberal churches follow the logic of what the Bible "should say", not what it actually says. The "easy believe-ism" that accepts everyone and no, you don't have to change to come into the church - this has made the church into a social club. A salt that has lost its savor. No thanks.