Asbury Punished for Believing The Bible - Ep. 934 

Asbury Seminary's Stand on Biblical Marriage

A Christian seminary's belief that marriage is between one man and one woman has become grounds for exclusion from a major denomination's approval list. For Christians who hold Scripture as their final authority, the news involving Asbury Theological Seminary raises a hard question: What happens when a church body treats historic biblical teaching as unacceptable?

The Smith and Rowland Show examines Asbury's removal from the United Methodist Church's list of approved schools for ordination, the seminary's refusal to change its convictions, and the long revival history connected to Asbury's campus community.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppo99GoAygM

 "Text generated by [rightblogger] based on (Smith and Rowland Video), Asbury Punished for Believing the Bible - Ep 934

Asbury Theological Seminary Removed From Methodist Approval

Asbury Theological Seminary has been removed from the United Methodist Church's approval list of schools for ordination. According to the discussion, the central issue was the seminary's refusal to abandon the biblical teaching that marriage is a lifelong covenant between one man and one woman.

That conviction was once broadly accepted across American denominations. Today, it places a school at odds with United Methodist leadership that has moved toward affirming same-sex marriage and LGBTQ+ clergy.

The decision is troubling because Asbury was not accused of a scandal, dishonest conduct, or theological confusion. The seminary held to a position it has stated openly: God defines marriage, and people do not have the authority to rewrite that definition.

"In another era, that position would have been considered basic Christianity. Today, it is apparently grounds for exclusion."

The issue reaches beyond one Kentucky seminary. It puts a larger question in front of every church and denomination: Does Scripture have the final word, or does cultural acceptance determine which parts of Scripture remain welcome?

David Watson's Refusal to Compromise

Asbury President David Watson made the seminary's position clear during the process. There were no quiet compromises, no reworded statements designed to satisfy denominational pressure, and no effort to hide what the school believes.

The seminary did not change its teaching to retain recognition. Instead, it continued to affirm the historic Christian view of marriage. That choice brought consequences, yet it also gave a clear witness to students, pastors, churches, and supporters who expect a Christian seminary to teach what the Bible says.

Standing firm can carry a cost. Churches have faced that pressure throughout history, whether it came through emperor worship in the Roman world, skepticism toward the supernatural, theological liberalism, or cultural demands around sexual ethics.

The temptation stays much the same. A church can soften difficult passages, avoid unpopular teachings, or make peace with the values of the moment. However, the churches that choose acceptance at the expense of biblical authority often lose the very message that makes them distinct.

For Asbury, the question was not whether its view of marriage would receive public approval. The question was whether the school would remain faithful to its stated convictions. The seminary chose to hold its ground.

A Long History of Revival Connected to Asbury

The controversy carries extra weight because Asbury has a long association with prayer, repentance, and revival. The episode recounts spiritual outpourings connected to the Asbury campus community that reach back more than a century.

Asbury Theological Seminary and Asbury University are separate institutions in Wilmore, Kentucky, although they share a nearby location and a closely connected Christian heritage. The well-known 2023 outpouring took place at Asbury University, while the current denominational action concerns Asbury Theological Seminary.

The dates discussed show a recurring pattern of extended prayer, confession, testimony, and worship.

These events did not produce a legacy of celebrity personalities or polished productions. Instead, the story of revival at Asbury has centered on ordinary people responding to God with honesty, humility, and prayer.

What the Asbury Revivals Had in Common

The repeated elements in these revivals matter. The gatherings were associated with prayer, confession, repentance, worship, reconciliation, and a renewed hunger for God's Word.

Confession played a major role. Students and others acknowledged sin rather than excusing it or treating it as a private matter without spiritual consequence. That confession led to relief, joy, and restored fellowship because the Christian message promises forgiveness through Jesus Christ.

Repentance also distinguished these moments. Repentance is more than feeling bad about wrongdoing. It involves turning away from sin and turning toward God. When that happens in the life of an individual or a community, it changes the tone of worship and the seriousness with which people receive Scripture.

The 2023 outpouring drew attention in part because of what it did not feature. The discussion points out that there were no political slogans, entertainment-driven services, or public figures placed at the center. People gathered for prayer and worship, and many remained because they wanted to seek God.

That pattern stands in sharp contrast to an approach that treats church as a product or a weekly event built around personality. Revival cannot be manufactured through better branding, louder music, or a church-growth plan. The Asbury history presented in the episode points instead to people who were willing to humble themselves before a holy God.

The United Methodist Church's Doctrinal Drift

The removal of Asbury Seminary did not come out of nowhere. It follows years of conflict inside the United Methodist Church over sexuality, biblical authority, ordination, and the denomination's future.

The discussion points to actions taken by United Methodist delegates in 2024. The denomination removed language from its Book of Discipline that described homosexual practice as incompatible with Christian teaching. It also approved same-sex weddings and opened the way for the ordination of openly LGBTQ+ clergy.

Those decisions led many congregations to leave the denomination because they no longer believed its leadership upheld historic Christian doctrine. Yet the movement toward theological revision continued.

The dispute is often presented as a disagreement over inclusion or personal dignity. Christians should treat every person with dignity and care. At the same time, love for people does not require changing what Scripture teaches about marriage, sexual behavior, repentance, or salvation.

A church cannot maintain biblical authority only when it is culturally easy. The authority of Scripture matters most when its teaching confronts the beliefs and desires of the surrounding culture.

When Culture Becomes the Final Authority

The Smith and Rowland Show argues that the deeper conflict is over authority. A denomination may retain Christian language, sing familiar hymns, and use biblical terms, yet still drift from biblical Christianity if it gives culture the final word.

That drift can happen gradually. Leaders may first avoid difficult passages, then reinterpret them, then treat those who still affirm them as harmful or unfit for leadership. In that setting, a seminary's adherence to the Bible becomes an offense rather than a foundation.

The speakers describe this pressure as part of a broader cultural ideology that reaches into churches, schools, government, media, and public life. They also argue that spiritual conflict cannot be separated from political and cultural conflict, because ideas about truth, morality, family, life, and human identity shape each area.

The episode also draws attention to another concern. It observes that denominational movements away from biblical sexual ethics often appear alongside one-sided criticism of Israel and reduced concern about terrorism directed at the Jewish state.

Whether the subject is marriage, gender, abortion, or Israel, the underlying issue remains the same: Who has the authority to define good and evil? Christians who believe the Bible must answer that question by placing God's Word above public opinion.

A Famine of God's Word

The discussion describes the present moment as a "famine of the Word of God." That phrase captures a problem that goes beyond denominational statements or church politics.

People can lose their appetite for Scripture much as a person can lose the sense of physical hunger after going without food for too long. At first, a Christian who neglects the Bible may feel the absence. Distractions then fill the space. Over time, the hunger fades, and spiritual emptiness begins to feel normal.

A church that stops teaching the whole counsel of God may still have meetings, music, programs, and crowds. Yet those things cannot replace the Word. Christians need Scripture because it corrects error, exposes sin, reveals God's character, and points people to Christ.

The answer is not another strategy for drawing people into a building. The aim is not attendance for its own sake. The aim is for people to be born again and to grow in faith through the truth of God's Word.

The episode returns to the basic Christian message: people need a new nature. They need forgiveness of sin, reconciliation with God, and the transforming work of Jesus Christ. That message is not made stronger by changing it to fit the culture.

Why Churches Must Be Willing to Stand Alone

Church history shows that cultural popularity and spiritual faithfulness do not always travel together. A church may face criticism, rejection, or separation because it refuses to change what Scripture teaches.

Asbury Seminary's removal may be painful, but the speakers see it as a moment that can clarify the school's identity. A denomination's approval cannot replace faithfulness to God. If recognition requires denying biblical conviction, then the price is too high.

The call to "come out from among them and be separate" is not a call for Christians to isolate themselves from people who disagree with them. It is a call to avoid partnership with teachings that deny the authority of God's Word.

Church members also have responsibilities in moments like this. They should know what their denomination teaches, ask leaders direct questions, and examine whether their church still believes the Bible. If a church or denomination rejects the biblical definition of marriage and the authority of Scripture, that decision deserves a serious response.

The history of Asbury's revivals offers a fitting reminder. Spiritual renewal has come when people pray, confess sin, seek God, and submit themselves to His Word. That path may not win cultural approval, but it is the path the seminary has chosen.

A Stand That Calls for Faithfulness

Asbury Theological Seminary's removal from the United Methodist approval list centers on a conviction that was once ordinary across American Christianity: marriage is between one man and one woman. The seminary did not hide that belief or bargain it away.

At the same time, Asbury's history points back to the kind of renewal many Christians long to see, renewal marked by prayer, repentance, confession, and a hunger for Scripture. Revival and biblical conviction belong together.

When institutions trade biblical authority for cultural acceptance, they may keep a religious appearance while losing the message that brings repentance and new life. Faithfulness to God's Word remains the firmer foundation, even when standing on it comes with a cost.