Ted Haggard's journey of "spiritual restoration" came to a halt this week at the request of the ousted New Life Church pastor.
A year after Haggard agreed to enter counseling with four ministers after his sex scandal, he asked to end the team's oversight of his recovery program. But New Life Church officials believe the termination of the relationship is premature, according to a statement on Tuesday.
Early last year, just months into his recovery program, the overseers had indicated that the restoration process could take years.
"New Life recognizes the process of restoring Ted Haggard is incomplete and maintains its original stance that he should not return to vocational ministry," read the statement.
Haggard, founder of New Life in Colorado Springs, resigned as president of the National Association of Evangelicals in November 2006 and was fired from New Life Church after a former male prostitute alleged a three-year cash-for-sex relationship. Haggard confessed to undisclosed "sexual immorality" and to buying methamphetamine.
The former megachurch pastor now lives in Phoenix and is a member of Phoenix First Assembly of God. Pastor Tommy Barnett, one of the overseers in the restoration team, said he will maintain an "accountability relationship" with Haggard.
Barnett runs the Phoenix Dream Center, helping the homeless, recovering alcoholics, drug addicts and prostitutes. In August, Haggard had reportedly said he would move in to the Dream Center, saying he could identify with the people there. But Haggard's counseling team denied the report and said he will not be doing any ministry work.
Since early in the recovery process, the overseers have strongly urged Haggard to seek secular employment.
New Life's statement said Haggard's leadership of the church had been extraordinary "for many years" and wished him and his family success in the future."
The church would not make further comment about Haggard's "spiritual restoration," the statement further said.
Haggard was replaced in August by Brady Boyd, former associate senior pastor at Gateway Church in Southlake, Texas. Despite a drop in attendance since the sex scandal, the now 10,000-member New Life congregation has been recovering under new leadership.
Comments
ifeelfine72—
“The Bible makes it very clear that slavery is ok, beating your slaves is ok, separating slave families is ok, enslaving children is ok and yet none of us thinks slavery is ok today. Why is that? Because we gained an understanding of the subject, we now understand what an evil institution it is.”
With this statement you say that the Bible is in error, correct? I presume you think this way because you say the Bible condones slavery, but now we’re more enlightened and know that slavery is wrong. I have two questions for you:
1) Why do you think Almighty God could not preserve His Word so that it would be inerrant?
2) If the Bible is right in some parts and wrong in others, how can you be so sure the Gospel is right?
Ifeelfine72,
Ruth and Naomi had husbands and children, not wives. David and Johnathon? They too had wives and children, where did it portray them as homosexual? I have loving relationships with men too, my son, my father, my brothers-in-law, my friends, but I'm not homosexual. What does sex have to do with love? I do not follow your reasoning.
feetxxxl,
<<for all those who say scripture says that homosexuality is a sin. please explain (no one........ i mean not one has been able to explain) romans 1:24-27 what lie was exchanged for what truth>>
The lie was idolatry - which is specified in "22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things." which is basically disobeying the first two commandments. Remember we are talking about Rome but idolatry is another word for materialism, to contextualize this.
When the Bible I read says "given over to" where God sort of just withdraws his hands, it means destruction. I can't say that because God acted on the Romans like he did in these verses that every homosexual relationship is meant only for sexual satisfaction no more than I can say that every heterosexual relationship is based on love (one person's devinition may not even closely resemble another's). But I can say that the man-man and woman-woman relationships in the Bible did not have a very productive end, nor were they ever portrayed as glorifying God - which is what we should hope to do, gay or straight, drunk or sober, obese or healthy, rich or poor, weak or strong. He takes us as we are and makes us anew.
feetxxxl-
The truth of God is everything God has revealed—about Himself, about us, about the world. Since God is the ultimate reality and the source of all truth, truth is what corresponds to reality as perceived by God. However, we don’t seek that truth; rather we try to invent truth to suit our own itching ears. Beginning in the Garden, mankind has fallen for and believed all kinds of lies concerning God. Instead of worshiping the Creator as we were designed to do, we worship almost everything else (created things). For those that are hardened in their heart to the things of God, He has given them over to their shameful desires—whatever they may be.
God has spoken quite clearly about human sexual relationships—they are to occur exclusively within a marriage between one man and one woman. All other forms—polygamy, adultery, rape, homosexuality, lust, etc—are a perversion of God’s truth and are to be rejected. Just because someone loves someone else doesn’t mean a sexual relationship is justified. I love my children, my parents, my siblings, and my friends, but I shouldn’t engage in sexual relationships with them.
ifeelfine,
I never said that all homosexual relationships are "disgusting" I said your putting words into the Bible was disgusting, and also into my posts as you do profusely. Again, I believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible, but that of course does not mean to take every single word, out of context and out of purpose as it literally stands. That means I believe in the truth of every word as it was intended and originally written. My stance on everything is based upon my faith, if yours isn't then ok, we know our differences. My bias is based on the Bible, yours is based on what you like, this is also clear.
Feet, that is not the only Bible passage that condemns homosexuality, it matters nothing at all what was the cause of them being "given" to unnatural lusts, it only matters that those lusts and relationships were wrong. I feel like I am speaking to a wall, perhaps it would be more useful if I did...
Chris333 - I maintain, as I've always maintained, that you cannot take the Bible literally. No one does, not you not anyone. Its really not possible. We all have our own preconcieved notions about it (myself included). Obviously I am 100% against slavery - and I've said I'm against abortion too but it is not based on a literal interpretation of the Bible. Your biases are clear mine are as well (you mentioned how disgusting you think homosexuality is, I see the beauty in loving relationships - and I think God does too).
for all those who say scripture says that homosexuality is a sin. please explain (no one........ i mean not one has been able to explain) romans 1:24-27 what lie was exchanged for what truth, and how was what entity of creation worshipped and served so that certain individuals were given over to homosexuality.
and to stand on 26 and 27 one has to also believe, that all homosexual relationships(320 million worldwwide) are about shame based lust and not mutual love, attraction, respect, and devotion.
and to this with no witness, no first hand knowledge, no eye witness, which even scripture demands..........can this be of the spirit of christ?
Ifeelfine,
They were not liberal or conservative Christians that were trying to get rid of slavery, they were Christians period. They used their knowledge of God and the Bible to oppose slavery, many in the south helped the slaves to go north.
For abortion, it doesn't matter either way, the problem is not one with the Bible, it is one with our perception of worldly events. The Bible is not debated here. Life does begin at conception, would you say the embryo is dead? Or would you say it is not human? If it is alive and human, then you are killing a living human who is completely innocent.
As for homosexuality you completely twisted those passages, nowhere does it ever say they were gay. All of them married people of the opposite sex. And even if they would have been engaged in homosexuality then they would have been guilty of sinning before God, and OT law called for their death. But it is disgusting that you would put something in scripture like that. Like I said, you cannot interpret it to say that, you have to change what it says. Ever heard of reading the Bible like it is? For that matter, sure loving same sex relationships exist in the Bible, but they are not sexual relationships, they are brotherly or sisterly. To even suggest otherwise simply goes against the culture, context, and actual words used in the Bible.
because you are applying your own standard to it (you feel life begins at conception). "
Reread what I said, and stop putting words in my mouth now. You seem to have a problem with this. And no I am not placing my standard on it, I am making a scientific assertation, and then backing my moral stance with the standard of the Bible, think about it for a little while, I am sure you will understand. But I do think you owe me an apology, for accusing me of something I did not do. Your words about slavery are worthless, you say the Bible is clear it is "ok" what do you mean by that? Does that mean good? Because the Bible never says that, it doesn't even say it is "ok" it just says what it is. Please read my comments below for my stance. Anyways, if you want to make the Bible look like it approves of slavery, then you are putting your own ideas into it, there is no reason we should take that stance.
As for understanding, you really need to take the plank out of your eye. You just stated that you feel abortion is wrong, not because the Bible says anything about abortion, but because you are applying your own standard to it (you feel life begins at conception). Of course we all apply our own understanding or our pastor's understanding or favorite author's understanding. The Bible makes it very clear that slavery is ok, beating your slaves is ok, separating slave families is ok, enslaving children is ok and yet none of us thinks slavery is ok today. Why is that? Because we gained an understanding of the subject, we now understand what an evil institution it is.
Chris333 - Actually it was the liberal Christians that were against slavery. The conservative Christians were the ones trying to keep it as it was (hence conserve it). The fundy's always try to claim what the religious left does and then claim if for their own later on just like you're doing.
As for abortion, I think we all agree they're human, what some can't agree on is when life begins - at conception or at some other point.
As for homosexuality, you're wrong again - ever heard of Ruth and Naomi? David and Jonathan? Loving same-sex relationships exist in the Bible whether you want to admit it or not.
Not only does God address His words of truth to those who are able to receive them, He actually conceals their meaning from those who are not. The preacher uses stories to make truth clear; our Lord often used them to obscure it. The parables of Christ were the exact opposite of the modern "illustration," which is meant to give light; the parables were "dark sayings" and Christ asserted that He sometimes used them so that His disciples could understand and His enemies could not. (See Matthew 13:10-17.) As the pillar of fire gave light to Israel but was cloud and darkness to the Egyptians, so our Lord's words shine in the hearts of His people but leave the self-confident unbeliever in the obscurity of moral night.
In natural matters faith follows evidence and is impossible without it, but in the realm of the spirit faith precedes understanding; it does not follow it. The natural man must know in order to believe; the spiritual man must believe in order to know. The faith that saves is not a conclusion drawn from evidence; it is a moral thing, a thing of the spirit, a supernatural infusion of confidence in Jesus Christ, a very gift of God.
Why People Find the Bible Difficult
by A. W. Tozer
Also, you said, "its only when we seek true understanding that we see what God really wants us to do"
Well what is true understading? Is that secular understanding? Personal understanding? Can we just re-write the Bible on whichever points offend us? What standard do you use for "true understanding" is it ifeelfine's, or Chris333's, or Rick Warren's, or Buddha's? Is it democratically decided? Can we democratically decide that God is not real, Jesus did not die for us, and other such things?
Ifeelfine,
Yes some people have misinterpreted the Bible, enslaving a person based upon their race, religion, or any other quality is a clear example. The Bible explains what to do if you are in the position of a slave or a "slave owner" not that slavery is good or bad. But we can see some clear points that would make slavery appear to be at best, less than ideal. Firstly, God did not create slaves for Adam and Eve, God's original plan was that all people would be free, only later did slavery come into play (just as earthly kings and such only came later), secondly, the NT is very clear that there is neither slave nor free in God's eyes, and that all are considered equal, finally slavery is never deemd right, which means that it is not right, it is at absolute best neutral, but due to the above we could assume it is negative. Indeed Christians were the first to decry slavery in America.
Homosexuality on the other hand has no such support from scriptures. God created Adam and Eve in the beginning, this was clearly the ideal, one man and one woman, not man and man or woman and woman. And the Bible is abundantly clear that homosexuality is wrong in God's eyes. There is no debate among people who believe in the Bible, and there is no amount of interpretation that can get rid of this, only a rewriting of the Bible can do it.
Abortion is an issue of what defines a human life, it is always wrong to kill an innocent in the Bible, if an unborn child is an unborn child then it is always wrong. So-called "pro-choice" advocates are betting their entire argument on that an unborn child at a certain stage is not actually human. In any case this is not a debate about what the Bible says.
Finally, there is no huge debate, all Christians who fully believe in the Bible are debating about little things, like whether the sentence should be a certain way or which translation best fits the original manuscripts. The only major debate is between the "liberal christians" who try to "re-interprate" scriptures in a politically friendly, watered down, pluralistic, 20th century context, and the actual Church which believes in the Bible.
Chris333 - Clearly there is lots of room for debate otherwise thse debates wouldn't be happening. As our understanding changes so too must our interpretation of the Bible. There wasn't any abortion to speak of 2000 years ago and yet today many of us use our knowledge of the Bible to point out the injustice of abortion. We did the same thing with slavery 100+ years ago - as a matter of fact, a literal reading of the Bible shows that slavery is ok - its only when we seek true understanding that we see what God really wants us to do. Most of the Christian's on this site have hardened hearts when it comes to same-sex relationship issues.
SheQuon,
Some passages are difficult to understand, some were misunderstood due to the Catholic Church's distortion, some scholars are just not willing to admit the truth and want to push their own agendas and that causes other scholars to have to defend the truth. The Bible has said virtually the same thing since it began, some parts were added, but it is clear what was and all scholars recognize this. The overall meaning of the Bible, and about 99% of it has stayed the exact same. A major part of the difficulty is seeing what the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic translates to. In any case this does not mean that the Bible is not trustworthy in any way, it just means that we still have more to discover about it. It is however clear on all major points of faith, and its stance on issues such as the sanctity of life and homosexuality, there is zero room for debate on these issues.