Time to Face the Music

Last night was one of the more solemn nights that I can remember in a long long time. I'm sure many of you felt the same as I did with the announcement of President Obama's victory. Flipping through various cable news networks, I realized it was official once FoxNews made their announcement. Long after my lovely wife went to bed I sat there watching the news in disbelief. I just couldn't wrap my head around how the incumbent President would be re-elected with the economy the way it is, or with unprecedented Presidential support for wickedness. Today I woke up and filled my morning with more news programs trying to understand why this happened.

Political commentators are stunned; Democrats reveling in their victory; Republicans fumbling over themselves as they try to salvage the party for four years from now. This morning I was thankful more than most days that I have re-calibrated my Twitter feed to include primarily Christian news and apologetics resources. Amidst the barrage of groanings and complaints, Frank Turk posted a letter from Reformed Baptist pastor, Tom Chantry. His article expressed exactly what I was feeling, and I can endorse it 100%. Please read it when you have time - I guarantee it will be an encouragement to you and very worthwhile.

Chantry resonated with me, especially near the end where he says:

Policies can address political circumstances, but they cannot address the fundamental weaknesses of the American soul. Where we stand today is not so radically different from where we stood in, say, 1980. We don’t need another Reagan; we need the Holy Spirit. If men are to turn from their sin and discover the wisdom that comes from serving God, they do not need better government, but the message which has been entrusted to the church. (Emphasis MINE).

For a variety of reasons, I am still a registered Republican (though significantly more conservative than my Party's official views). It is astonishing to hear about the two paths being discussed for our party's future. First, that we need an even more moderate and/or left-leaning candidate that is more "in-touch" with the American people. Or second, we need to have a true conservative run for office. While my gut is to agree with the latter, I took a step back and considered what Tom Chantry said: "We don't need another Reagan; we need the Holy Spirit."

Our nation has voted twice for increased taxes, unwise spending, the promotion of homosexuality and abortion. The election of President Obama was a wicked decision on behalf of our fellow citizens, there are no two ways about it. The America I grew up believing in doesn't exist today (and perhaps didn't truly exist in the form I thought it did while I was a child either). Christian morality has been utterly abandoned and it is time for us to accept that. I don't think I understood that until this morning. Until today, I had hope that my fellow citizens, when presented with clear evidence and facts would be able to make common sense decisions.

But as the Apostle Paul in the Scriptures writes:

²⁸ And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, ²⁹ being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, ³⁰ slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, ³¹ without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; ³² and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them. (Romans 1:28-32, NASB; Bold MINE).

This national election was a demonstration of the judgment of God upon our nation. This is the only explanation for why our fellow Americans would have made the decision that they did. Even "common sense" to make decisions is a gift from God, one that He appears to have withheld at this time. I hear Christians talking a lot about how we are a small minority in our society, but I'm not sure we fully grasp how small a minority we are. I know of only two Christians at the workplace, and looking over some of the demographics and polling data from yesterday's election - it seems true Christianity in America is a lot smaller than we think.

I began to think about what all this means for me as a Christian in this kind of society. It seems reasonable that in the not too distant future, Christians will face forms of persecution probably in the form of financial discomfort - and we need to be ready to face that. Christ Himself said that we ought to count the cost of discipleship. But apart from any potential hardship, we have an abundance of opportunities to proclaim the gospel. My prayer today has been that I might be like Paul who was "eager" to preach the gospel to those in Rome. Where did the Apostle's confidence come from? He says, "¹⁶ For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek" (Romans 1:16, NASB). 

There are changes I need to make in my life. I need to take my faith more seriously. I need to consider what it means to count the cost of being one of Jesus' disciples. I need to be more bold in my witness for the one true and living God. I need to not be ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, no matter their background.


As always, thanks for reading,

Rusty

Why do Christians pray?

Why do we pray? What’s the point? Jesus prayed, “Father, if You are willing, remove this ^acup from Me; ^byet not My will, but Yours be done.” – Luke 22:42 NASB  He prayed that the Father would make it so He did not have to be crucified.  “If there is any other way, please don’t do this to Me” He prayed. Yet He still went there, and He still had to die a very painful death. This was Jesus for heaven’s sake! The second member of the Trinity, God Himself in human flesh, and His request was denied.

Then we have Moses.  Shortly after God had freed the Israelites from captivity in Egypt He told Moses that He was going to destroy them because even though He had done this great work for them they were rejecting Him. Moses prayed to God and,” …the Lord changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.” – Exodus 32:14 NASB

So what’s the difference? In the first example we have the brutal torture and killing of the most innocent man to ever walk the earth. God rejected Jesus’ request, so that He might use the evil that those men intended for good. For the good of saving His people.

 In the second we have an evil people totally rejecting God despite the power He had shown them to free them. He used Moses’ prayer to save His people from His own wrath.

We pray because our prayer might be the thing God uses to change the direction things seem to be headed. But we do so with the knowledge that He is God and His purposes are beyond us. Trusting God is not trusting that He will always answer our prayers. Trust in God is the understanding that no matter what happens, if our prayers are answered or not, He is in control and it serves a purpose. We may not know that purpose, but we trust anyway.

The "Affordable" Care Act

Before my morning cup of coffee, I anxiously turned on the television to see if the Supreme Court had made their decision. To my surprise the news was discussing the court's ruling, but I, ... I couldn't believe my eyes. Figuring the lack of caffeine affected my comprehension early in the morning I re-read the breaking news headline: "Obamacare upheld by Supreme Court." How could the highest court in our land that is supposed to defend the United States Constitution actually rule in favor of such a law?

Secretly, and a little arrogantly, I thought I knew the court's decision the moment a majority of the States sued the Federal government. As we now know, I was terribly mistaken. To be fair, though, it was only reasonable for me to assume the ruling would strike down at least parts of Obamacare, if only the individual mandate. The very idea that the Founding Fathers would support such an infringement upon the rights and liberties of the people to be coerced into buying a private service or else be fined a penalty, is an absurdity among absurdities.Then again, when you consider that our Supreme Court Justices have also found an imaginary Constitutional "right" to murder your unborn children, the contradiction of the ruling on Obamacare makes more sense.

President Obama: "The fact that you've looked up Merriam's dictionary, the definition of 'tax increase,' indicates to me that you're stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise you wouldn't have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition."

George: "I want to check for myself because your critics say it is a tax increase."

President Obama: "My critics say everything's a tax increase. My critics say that I'm taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we are going to have an individual mandate or not."

George: "But you reject it as a tax increase?"

President Obama: "I absolutely reject that notion."


It is the epitome of hypocrisy that the President of the United States, who was vehemently opposed to Obamacare being a tax, made his case before the Supreme Court on the notion that it is Constitutional because of Congress's ability to tax her citizens. I'm not foolish enough to forget that many politicians - Democrats and Republicans - are simply playing the part of politician. This is precisely what Obama is doing here, and it disgusts me. He has proven before the American people that he cares more about his signature legislation than being honest with those he claims to serve. He has dishonored the office of President, and he ought to be ashamed of the fact that he felt the need to repeatedly defend a lie.

On a quick rabbit trail - I am certain that the Romney campaign will zero in on Obamacare being a new tax with our present economic situation.

Twitter captured a quote that I simply cannot say better myself: "@BenShapiro: Chief Justice Roberts was the worst part of the Bush legacy." Yup. Bush 43 was a Compassionate Conservative, and is flawed in his over-reaching governmental interference and overspending. But I have to 100% agree with the statement that Justice John Roberts' vote in favor of upholding Obamacare will be the greatest mistake of Bush's Presidential legacy. If you thought Bush spent too much, you haven't seen anything until you've seen what the added bureaucracy to the American health care system will do to increases in taxes as well as health care premiums and costs. The one positive aspect of Justice Roberts' written decision is that he set a precedent for the "Commerce Clause" in the Constitution by limiting Congress's ability to coerce citizens to participate in commerce.

Why any sane person who saw the immense bureaucracy that existed in the form of hospitals and insurance companies would think that adding the Federal government to that bureaucracy would somehow make health care more affordable ... is beyond me. What we do know is that forty-seven million Americans who were previously without health insurance will suddenly be insured under Obamacare. The amount of doctors are not increasing. Supplies across the health care sector are not increasing. The demand will drastically increase, but the supply will not. You tell me: what will this do to costs? Unless the government utterly controls prices we will see prices go up and up and up.

I'll be bold enough to predict that this is the beginning of the single payer system. Give it was a few years, but you'll begin to see employers and insurance companies bow out of the health care industry/business. Why would they do that? Because they won't be able to profit under such stringent government regulation and control. Too much regulation kills businesses and jobs. I fear that one day our only choice will be the government's single payer system.

Death panels have already been discussed as a part of Obamacare. What are these so-called 'death panels?' Basically, no matter what anyone tells you, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Everyone's taxes will go up - even taxes on the middle class (egads!). What this will mean is that care will need to be rationed. Services that we are accustomed to may not always be readily available, and actual panels are discussed in the Affordable Care Act to determine how, when and to whom care will be administered. This is scary stuff. I don't know about you, but I thought there was too much bureaucracy between me and my doctor without the Federal government. Now, it seems there will be barriers more thick than we ever thought possible.

It is only natural that since the government will be "providing" health care coverage that they will want their citizens as healthy as possible. The trouble with this is that the Feds may come knocking one day to enforce eating and exercise habits (imagine: New York on a grander scale).

Abortion is covered under Obamacare. You and I will be paying for other people's "right" to murder their unborn children, even if it is against our religious convictions. Our rights to religious liberty is stepped on by those who want to murder the innocent.

A little part of our freedom dies with Obamacare. If you don't want health insurance: too bad. If you only want certain limited health insurance coverage: too bad. Your liberty has been taken away.

I think it is safe to say that both sides on this issue want everyone who wants health insurance to have it. But the Federal government is not the solution to our problem. Government will only add to our problems, and I wonder with amazement at the behemoth that will fester and grow under the newfound Obamacare legislation. Mitt Romney is not my perfect candidate, but compared to the sitting President, he is a ray of sunshine. He has said his first act is to overturn this infringement upon our personal liberty, and that is another reason to make sure Obama is a one-term President.

Drumroll Please

As the reader might have noticed, for a few months now we have added 2 new contributors to our little corner of cyberspace that require an introduction: Scott Nelson and Metzger.

Because of his unique situation I will start off by introducing Metzger. For a variety of reasons, Metzger has asked that his identity be kept private so as to not become unnecessarily entangled at the workplace. He has been known to me for a few years now, and I am honored that he is willing to contribute to the blog.

Where shall I begin with an introduction of Scott Nelson? Whatever I say will fail to do him justice, but I will do my best (not to fail ... to do him justice =)). He and I have been best friends since we were in 7th grade, which makes that almost 17 years now - where does the time go? We grew up in the same Arminian Charismatic Mega-Church, and were converted to Calvinism around the same time. In fact, because Scott was first convinced of Calvinism he cited Romans 9 to me so many times that I was forced to be confronted with a chapter I had previously never studied honestly.

He was the first to get married ... to his lovely wife, Mindy. My wife and I have asked Scott and Mindy if they would be an additional Uncle and Aunt to our daughter, Molly. 

If you will bear with me for a few geeky moments, Scott and I have always had a soft spot for video games, RTS's and MMORPG's especially. Yes, we are back to Wow ... again. Who woulda thought? To say that Scott is gifted in figuring out the complexities of video games and technology in general, would be an understatement.

One reason I am excited that he will be contributing to Musings is because of his keen insight into many many subjects. His ability to understand opposing viewpoints, analyze an argument, and make sense of an appropriate way to respond has always benefited me personally. In fact, Scott is usually the first person I go to when I need help thinking an idea through, or for advice.

Scott also brings an element of humor and appropriate sarcasm to a discussion that is contagious. He has the ability to fill a room with laughter, and can captivate his audience.

But my favorite aspect about him is his passion and love for the triune God. He has been a consistent godly example to me over the course of my life. He reads the Scriptures, talks about the Scriptures, and shares the gospel with his unbelieving family and friends. Beyond question, Scott and I have many similar interests that have added to our friendship, but the most important of these is our common confession of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Proverbs 18:24 says: "A man of too many friends comes to ruin, But there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother" (NASB). This verse describes Scott's friendship to me. Mr. Nelson ... the rest I leave to you, and I am eager to see what you have to say. Welcome to Musings from our Caffeinated Highs!

All that it Entails

If you're like me, you've come to realize that being a husband and a father is different than you thought beforehand. Being married is much more than dating, and fatherhood more than babysitting. Whatever I thought I knew about family before having a family of my own, has been replaced by the experiences I now have every day. And you know what? It is much greater than what I imagined it was. My wife is the greatest joy and blessing I have received - apart from the free grace given to me by God. My 11 month old daughter has only added to that joy. Truly, God has made me a blessed man.

My pastor preached a sermon on Father's Day that was directed to the husbands and fathers. I will spend some time here relaying some of the sermon's key points that have impacted me. Pastor Fry's primary text was Psalm 112, and from that I will focus on verse 1:

Praise the Lord!
How blessed is the man who fears the Lord,
Who greatly delights in His commandments.

Pastor Fry's first point was that father's should be the worship leader of the family. While this doesn't sit well in our egalitarian day and age, the Bible is very clear that men and women are equal in nature and value but have different roles. One of the father's roles is to be the spiritual leader of the household. The father's role includes leading in the reading and discussion of the Scriptures, of prayer, and the reinforcement of godliness in the home. Joshua 24:14-15 reads:

¹⁴ “Now, therefore, fear the Lord and serve Him in sincerity and truth; and put away the gods which your fathers served beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve the Lord. ¹⁵ If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

The father needs to be concerned about idols in the household - this includes in your own life. Even though it is rare for most Westerners to actually worship a man-made statue or some-such creation, anything that receives worship and adoration other than the one true God should be considered an idol. We are commanded by God to worship only Him, so we must diligently fight the human tendency to prioritize anything before Him. Knowing myself, I have a tendency to love a little too much legitimate things: books, video games, or spending time with friends. It isn't that there is anything immoral with reading books, or playing video games, but these activities in excess or given too high a priority can lead to idol worship. A key question to ask when determining precisely what you worship is this: "When you have time to allow your mind to wander, what is it you spend most of your time thinking about?"

Husbands and fathers, talk about the faith with your wife and your children. Take some time away from the television and explain why the faith is important to you, and how it pertains to them. Let your children know that as long as they live under your roof, they will serve the Lord.

The godly father receives all of his given responsibilities, even ones that present their own unique challenges. One such challenge is to teach your children the value of obedience to you and other given authorities. First hand, I have had to apply the Biblical instruction to not spare the rod with my sweet daughter. After the command to do something (or not do something), and sometimes following a warning or two, we do lightly slap her hand or flick her wrist. Why do we do this? Because we are teaching her the value and importance of obeying Daddy and Mommy. There is no meaningful discussion with an 11 month old, and sometimes there isn't time for one. The only thing she understands is that if she willfully disobeys there are consequences.

Immediately after an administered punishment, there is a brief sentence or two, usually along the lines of: "You were punished because you didn't listen to Daddy [or Mommy]. You need to always listen to Daddy and Mommy. I love you." This routine is always followed by hugs and kisses. As you can imagine, this kind of discipline will become more in-depth as she gets older. The punishments will change, and the conservation and explanation will as well.

Fathers should pray for his children's salvation. In fact, Emily and I pray that the Lord delivers Molly from her sins at a young age.We should not be naive enough to believe that because she and I are believers in Christ that our daughter will be as well. The Lord saves whom He wills, and so I always want to proclaim the gospel to her and pray for her repentance unto life.

The godly man looks to the future. Think about your retirement and what inheritance you might leave to your children and your grandchildren. For Americans, when Social Security likely won't be there to supplement your income, make preparations for that ahead of time so you don't outlive your retirement savings. Also think about the legacy you hope to leave behind. When your children and your grandchildren talk about you after you're gone, hopefully it will be about your consistent godly example.

Finally, the father needs to be patient and forgiving. Your children will let you down and they will sin. You need to set an example of what it means to forgive and to be patient toward them. Pastor Fry gave an example that sometimes, it's a good idea to cut them some slack. When you've been on their case all day give them a break. Does not our heavenly Father act patiently toward us many many times? We ought to always look to our God's example toward us, and seek His help, without which we would accomplish nothing.

You're a Slave to Someone

Us Westerners are interesting folks, aren't we? The American social experiment was an oddity among oddities in the annals of human history. I mean, it isn't every day a group of people get to decide a system of government for themselves. Many blessings came as a result of our new-found freedoms and liberties, including the eventual abolition of the institution of slavery. The abolitionist movement was brought about by the philosophical consistency of our Constitutional and natural human rights, and justly so. One unfortunate bi-product of our American liberty has been the affect on how we view ourselves in relation to God and His moral requirements. After all, we are Americans and no one can tell us what to do! We are slaves to no one!

Jesus has something very different to say on the topic of slavery:

So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “ If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” They answered Him, “ We are Abraham’s descendants and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that You say, ‘You will become free’?” Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever. So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed. (John 8:31-36, NASB).

The Lord Jesus speaks of the crowd's need to be "made free," which was not received well as you can tell by their response: "We are Abraham's descendants and have never yet been enslaved to anyone..." Weeell, were they enslaved or weren't they? They claimed that because they were Abraham's descendants that they couldn't possibly be enslaved! But Jesus plainly states that "everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin." This is also how we all are born into this life, and we all need to be set free by the true and living God.

Paul's masterful letter to the Romans addresses this issue:

Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness? (Romans 6:16, NASB).

When you obey sin, you are a slave of sin. This is how everyone enters into the world: enslaved to sin and to the desires of the devil. Now, the Christian has been set free from the chains of sin and has a new master: Jesus Christ. 


Wait just a minute ... don't Christians continue to sin? Yes, they do. Personally, I can't remember a day where I didn't sin in some way. The difference now for the Christian is that they have been set free from the bondage of sin and now serves a new master. Men who remain enslaved to sin are given over to its lusts and desires. They love their sin! Though they may not like the consequences of their sin. By contrast, the Christian hates his sin, and fights against it. It is not natural for him to sin.


A question asked by my pastor this morning is worth repeating: "Why is it that nominal Christians want to know how close to the line of the world they can get? The real Christian is concerned about holiness of life and sanctification." I have often wondered how many so-called Christians continue to call themselves Christians when it is plain they have no interest whatsoever in pleasing the Lord. It is not amusing to me to try to lean over the edge of the cliff towards sin when God speaks clearly about our moral behavior. 


True Christianity involves obedience: "But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness" (Romans 6:17-18, NASB). All Christians were slaves of sin. "Were." This past tense verb indicates that Christians are no longer slaves of sin, but are slaves to God. We naturally want to perform the works of our Father God. 


Finally, it can be easy to miss that Paul offers thanks to God for this truth. If you are a Christian, it is only because the Son has set you free - and you are free indeed! But what are you freed from? Bondage to sin! Now you can serve the interests of Christ and continue to do what He wants. Praise God for this! No more are we bound by the devil's commands! Your heart of stone was turned into a heart of flesh and you have been raised in newness of life to do good works that are pleasing to God.

Homosexual Concentration Camps?

"I figured a way out, a way to get rid of all the lesbians and queers, but I couldn't get it past the Congress ... Build a great big, large fence – 50 or a 100 miles long – and put all the lesbians in there ... Fly over and drop some food. Do the same thing with the queers and the homosexuals, and have that fence electrified so they can't get out. Feed them. And you know in a few years, they'll die out. You know why? They can't reproduce." 

Charles Worley, pastor of Providence Road Baptist Church in North Carolina, uttered these words in his May 13th "sermon," and the video recording soon went viral on the Internet. Under normal circumstances I might be inclined to make a few cute remarks; maybe a few sarcastic comments. In this case, I am in no mood to mince words. This man has done nothing but demonstrate his abject and baseless bigotry for homosexuals. He has proven himself to be overflowing with hatred and I cannot consider these to be the words of a true Christian (or at the very least I have *serious* doubts about the present state of his soul based on his actions). He has shamed the name of Christ, and I pray that the Lord brings him swiftly to repentance from his hatred, bigotry, and idiocy.

There are no two ways about it, folks. The man is an ignorant fool and he has done immense harm to the reputation of Jesus Christ. Christians need to be outspoken against this and all who imitate him. I thank God that we have a government built on laws that prohibit the very kind of hateful Nazi-esque goals of Mr. Worley.

It is true that Christianity is incompatible with homosexuality, but Christians are required by holy Scripture to take a completely different approach than Mr. Worley in how we interact with and speak to the LGBT community. The reason being that Christianity is also incompatible with Mr. Worley's religion. Whatever religion he is promoting, that is not the same religion I belong to. The Apostle Peter offers some insight into how Christians should respond to the world:

¹³ Who is there to harm you if you prove zealous for what is good? ¹⁴ But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. And do not fear their intimidation, and do not be troubled, ¹⁵ but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; ¹⁶ and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame. ¹⁷ For it is better, if God should will it so, that you suffer for doing what is right rather than for doing what is wrong. (1 Peter 3:13-17, NASB)

Verse 15 is surely one of the most well-known verses by Christians in the New Testament, yet the surrounding context offers invaluable insight into what Peter meant. He begins by making the point that if you do good no one will generally harm you, and even if you end up suffering for doing what is good then you are blessed. Only at this point does Peter venture into saying what he says in verse 15: "but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence." The believer in the Lord must always be ready to offer a defense and an answer for the hope that is in him. Do I need to even add that Peter's point is a 180 degrees different direction than the views held by Pastor Worley? What do I mean? In a nut shell, that a defense of the Biblical understanding of marriage and human sexuality as designed by God is a logical and rational viewpoint. All Mr. Worley has done is blurt out a few unmeaningful, irrational and bigoted statements jumbled together in a single message.

How is the positive message of the defense for the hope that we have as Christians supposed to be delivered? "With gentleness and reverence." Mr. Worley was anything but gentle and reverent. In fact, the following verse was intended to warn Christians against the very behavior we saw in Mr. Worley: "and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame." Unfortunately for the pastor from North Carolina, as he faces criticism it could not properly be called slander because he is guilty of bigotry. 

Where do Christians in our society fit into this discussion? First and foremost, very differently than how Charles Worley has decided to make his ridiculous contribution. We are ambassadors for the Lord Jesus Christ, and we are to love our fellow sinners by delivering our message with gentleness and reverence. If you count yourself a slave of Christ then you must not remain silent ... for two reasons: (1) out of love for God; and (2) out of love for fellow sinners. The Lord of the Universe had compassion on you and you ought to have compassion on your neighbor, your friends, your co-workers, and your family who have yet to experience the undeserving grace of Jesus Christ. We should pray for the unbelievers in our lives - that God might be merciful to them and grant repentance unto saving faith in Him, and that we might be instruments to preach the foolish message of the gospel of Christ to all people (including the homosexual community). 

Same-Sex Marriage Dialogue

The following is a conversation on facebook about homosexuality and same-sex marriage. First will appear the initial comment, followed by my response. I will be adjusting the names and personal references in brackets.

------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi [Metzger]! It's your [friend] from West Hollywood. I'd love the opportunity to have you experience our life for a day...being gay, that is. It's the way I was born and it's a valid lifestyle, that while you do not have to agree with, you should not discriminate and preach against. I think that often times it's too easy to judge. I don't agree that you are a "hater", in fact I remember how sweet you and [your siblings] all are! I would suggest that you take a second and maybe closer look at what you are protesting so much, you might just be surprised that we are all the same and there isn't that much to be afraid of. It's just love and it deserves equality, like every other type of love. Congrats on creating your amazing family - they are truly beautiful. Love and light! xo [NAME]

------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------


Thank you for your thoughtful comment. It is great to hear from you, I only wish that we had connected over something more pleasant - in fact, we should schedule that sometime because it has been far too long =).

I appreciate the fact that your thoughts were direct and well-meaning. I will do my best to respond in turn to you. But before I get to the meat of what I have to say, I would like to add a few things that are obvious to all, but are helpful to hear again. Firstly, you are [my good friend] and no matter your sexual preference I will love you and care about you because [we are friends]. Second, my caring for you will not change if you continue in the homosexual lifestyle. Third, if we end up disagreeing, I hope that we can remain loving towards one another.

And now ...

I also wish you had the opportunity to experience my life for a day … being a Christian. Consideration of the other side’s perspective is vital in having a better understanding of one’s own beliefs about something. While I do not doubt the sincerity of your experience(s) as a gay man, I also have firm beliefs about homosexuality and human sexuality that are different than yours (not that that’s a surprise =)). Please let me just say that I very much appreciate that you recognize that my differing viewpoints as a Christian do not automatically make me hateful towards the homosexual community. Thank you for that. Of course, I am going to afford you the exact same privilege in my assumption that you are not hateful for disagreeing with me.

To add further breadth to my perspective on how I have arrived at my conclusions, I need to begin by saying that my Christian faith is the single most important part of my life. Christianity is not, like some would prefer, one compartment of my life that I only express at church on Sunday. Rather, it is the central tenet of my experience in this life. I live and breathe my Christian faith every day, and I will go so far as to say it impacts how I behave at work, in public, at home, at church, even intruding upon my very thoughts, beliefs, and my worldview. So to say that Christianity is important to me would be an understatement. I love the triune God of the Bible more than I love my wife, my daughter, my career, or my possessions.

You can begin to see how I, as a Christian, will approach the issue of homosexuality and human sexuality in general. You said: “I think that often times it's too easy to judge.” I couldn’t agree more! People are too rash in their decision-making, especially when it comes to moral judgments. Rather than depend on my feelings, or my inclinations, I look to the unbiased source: the Bible. The Bible is the absolute authority for the believer in Jesus Christ, and is required to adjust his viewpoints based upon what God says in the inspired Scriptures.

Specifically, with regards to sexuality and marriage, the Bible does address this issue very clearly. In fact, the Lord Jesus was asked by the Jewish religious leaders whether “it [is] lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” Jesus’ response is something we should note: “4 And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘ For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” (Matthew 19:3-6, NASB).

Jesus’ approach was to take the Pharisees head on in their absurd question. What I enjoy most about the Lord’s response was that he took the discussion back to the source: the creation itself, dealing with the ordaining of the roles of men and women. Jesus asked whether they had read from the book of Genesis that “He who created them from the beginning made them male and female.” From that, Jesus led right into an interpretation of the institution of marriage: between one man and one woman.

This is why Christians believe marriage is between one man and one woman. This is also why Christians believe homosexuality is a sin - not only because the Bible directly states it as such - but because the Bible positively explains that human sexuality is to be exclusively expressed heterosexually in the covenant of marriage.

You stated that you believe you were born gay. From a Biblical perspective, this is not so. While I would never presume to doubt the sincerity of feelings or inclinations you have - same-sex attraction, etc - what I would say from a Christian standpoint, is that feelings and inclinations do not justify behavior. For example, one thing that I have struggled with my entire life is envy. I have had desires to have more stuff, or the traits and abilities of others. This has been something I have felt and experienced from a very early age. Here is the question though: would I be justified to practice being envious of others … or going a step further … would I be justified in defining my entire life by my envy? Obviously, I would not be justified in doing that. But why? Because God’s Law requires that human beings not be envious (in fact, He says so in the same passage in discussing homosexuality in Romans chapter 1). Bringing it all back, in the same way homosexuality is not justified simply because one feels same-sex attraction.

Now, what I have to say next is important. I am a sinner. You are a sinner. Every human being that has ever lived or ever will live is a sinner. What that means is that everyone is born into this world guilty of breaking the requirements of God’s Law, and continues every day of his/her life rebelling against that Law in some way. Practically, this is how Christians are able to not be self-righteous, because … how can we? Christians are awful people just like non-Christians are awful people. I am not better than non-Christians, and I am not better than homosexuals. We are all on a even keel when it comes to how we would inherently stand before God in-and-of ourselves.

This leads me to mention why I am passionate about this subject, and other subjects involving sinful behavior, human sexuality, religion, worldviews etc etc … Because the good news about Jesus Christ is one that says that sinners should turn away from their sinful desires and behaviors unto faith/trust in the living God of the universe. It is my greatest desire to see you turn from a homosexual lifestyle and love the same God that I worship. I mean that, with all sincerity. This does not mean that if you remain gay, and a non-Christian, that I will suddenly harbor ill will towards you, or cease loving you. Quite the contrary! As we have seen, I view myself equally inherently guilty before God, no better than the homosexual community … all of this is used to keep my own pride in check (and believe me, God knows I need the help with fighting against pride). But whenever I have written about homosexuality, you have always been in the back of my mind. Why? Because you are [close to me]. But more than that, I can relate to you because I am also a sinner - only that I have been delivered from the consequences of my sin by the grace of God that I do not deserve. I hope the same for you.

One final note I will add for the sake of clarity: in response to a second comment you made in this thread, you stated: “The bible states that we should stone a woman who cheats on her husband? And that shell fish is an abomination as well.” First of all, I need to ask: have you read the entirety of the Old and New Testaments? The reason I ask is because this is a common misconception made typically by atheists and others trying to prove inconsistency in the Bible between the moral standards of God. There is a clear distinction in the Bible between moral aspects of God’s Law (that has existed since the beginning of Creation) and the ceremonial aspects of the Law (that existed only as a part of the Jewish nation-state in the Old Testament that were meant to differentiate the Jews from the surrounding peoples). The ceremonial aspects of the Law were actually done away with with the arrival of the New Covenant started by Jesus Christ. There is an entire book in the New Testament that deals with this subject: the book of Hebrews. For further reading, I would recommend a book written by one of my elders at church: The Same-Sex Controversy by Dr. James R. White (co-authored by Jeff Neil).

What we are talking about are among the most important topics, and should be taken seriously by both sides. We may not end up agreeing, but I will say that regardless of whether we agree or not, I will never support legislation that tries to take away one’s liberties for being a homosexual (if, at some point, we want to discuss whether continuing to define marriage as between one man and one woman would then take away liberties of homosexuals, I will be happy to do so).

You stated later in your added comment: “You realize that one day very soon from now these views of "faith" are going to be completely viewed as hatred - and that is when the religious right will have to explain to their children and grandchildren that they were one of the people who hid behind God to promote hatred and violence by calling homosexuality a sin.”

Actually, I believe many in our culture have already begun viewing the views I just expressed as hateful. What do I have to say in response? It is irrational to say that my well thought-out argument stems from hatred of any sort. I have demonstrated very clearly that I believe the behavior of homosexuality is sinful, but that I distinctly do not hate or harbor any negative feelings towards the homosexual community, whatsoever. Again, how can I if I take my religious faith seriously? If I really believe that the Christian message is true: that all people are sinners before a holy and just God, then how could I possibly view myself as better in value or in dignity than any other human being? Answer: I couldn’t.

What I will explain to my children and grandchildren (and maybe … great-grandchildren =)) is what the Bible says, regardless of whether it is popular. I don’t expect my beliefs to be popular … they never have been in my lifetime. But I don’t believe what I believe because I hope to join the majority opinion. I believe what I believe about homosexuality, and the Christian faith because I believe my God is reigning over the universe, and I love Him more than anything else.

Thank you for considering what I have to say, thus far. I do want to extend an invitation to either continue dialogue on this subject, or other related subjects, via facebook, email, telephone or in person.

Is it Hateful to Believe Homosexuality is Sinful?

Bigot. Hateful. Close-minded. These accusations are becoming more and more commonplace against Christians in our society today. And over what issue? All sorts of issues, actually, but one is gaining more momentum ahead of the others: the issue of homosexuality. On Tuesday, an anonymous commenter commented on an article I posted accused me of being hateful and close-minded towards homosexuals. Thankfully, Scott and Cory ran to my defense by pointing out the irrationality and utter insanity of those accusations. But let's face it folks, as soon as someone in Western culture uses terms like "bigot," "hateful," "hate speech" or "close-minded" the thinking part of people's brains shuts down and irrationality takes over.

Otherwise how could this anonymous poster make these kinds of accusations towards me? Did he not read where I specifically stated that I do not hate homosexuals? I stated that I am a fellow sinner with homosexual men and women; I am no better than they. I, likewise, was born into this world deserving of death, judgment and Hell. Please let me spell it out even further ... homosexuals are equal in value and dignity to Christians and non-homosexuals. I am not prejudiced against them, and wish them no ill will or harm whatsoever. In fact, if ever there was a law designed to physically harm homosexuals I would march in the streets to defend their human and Constitutional rights for a peaceful existence.

Having stated all that, Christians are required to recognize the lifestyle and behavior of homosexuality as sinful as taught in the Bible. What some folks are unwilling to accept is that Christians can disagree with a lifestyle choice and not hate someone. Going beyond that, Christians don't stop with not-hating the LGBT community, we do our best to love them. This doesn't mean that we approve of homosexuality, but we can still care about them as our fellow citizens, neighbors, coworkers, friends and family members. We desire to live peaceably with all men, so far as it depends on us.

The following video is from the National High School Journalism Convention this past April. It features a few minutes of Dan Savage attacking Christians and the Bible for supporting bullying of homosexuals. Be warned that Mr. Savage uses some foul, strong, and inappropriate language in this video that is not suitable for children at all.

Let me ask you something: were the Christians under attack the bigots in this video? Or was it Dan Savage? Ironically, and so far, Mr. Savage has been given a pass because he is defending homosexual rights (that they don't have?), therefore he must be left alone. The double standard and the inconsistency is almost too much to bear.

As Christians, we must be ready and willing to answer for our beliefs. It is unpopular to believe some of the things we are required to believe ... like homosexuality being a sin. But there are good reasons, logical reasons, reasons that actually make sense for us to believe them. If we want to love our fellow man, including the homosexual community, then we cannot pretend that their lifestyle is not sinful. Disregarding the natural order of male-ness and female-ness as designed by God would be the most hateful thing we could do to the LGBT community. It is out of love for them, and for the triune God of Scripture that we steadfastly hold to these truths.

We disagree with the homosexual lifestyle, and yet we do not hate gays and lesbians. Christians are able to do this, because we have experienced the undeserved love of God.

Facebook Meanderings

[The following is a response to anti-Christian and pro-gay comments on facebook]

------------------------------------------------------------

Miranda -

(Miranda, for the sake of citing you, I will be referring to you in the third person at the beginning of each citation =))

Miranda said: “I think there is a huge difference between two loving and consenting adults and pedophilia or bestiality or incest or murder. The last four inflict harm on an another being, but homosexuality harms no one involved. Even if you believe it does on a spiritual level, it still doesn't compare to the physical harm that comes from the practice of the last four. Even if incest is practiced between two consenting adults there is still harm caused if a child is conceived, since that child has an exponentially higher risk for genetic disorders. I love you and respect you opinion, but I think in this case comparing homosexuality to such destructive actions is kind of like saying a breeze is really a hurricane.”

There is not a dispute about whether murder or homosexuality cause more physical harm. Beyond question murder causes more physical harm. However, homosexuality not only causes spiritual harm, but also causes physical harm to him/herself and to his/her sexual partner(s). Considering not only that gay men have (on average) many sexual partners, the sexual acts and the lifestyle itself significantly reduce their average lifespan. Therefore, homosexuality literally is a matter of life and death.

But apart from the harm to oneself and to one’s sexual partners, is homosexuality harming anyone else? The answer is: yes. Our actions and behaviors have an impact on those around us: our friends, family, and the culture of our society. It is a destructive influence to marriage and to the family because a family starts with a husband and wife (one man and one woman).

This is not hateful. This is not discrimination. This is also not a denial of Constitutional rights - in fact, homosexuals have the same right as everyone else … to marry a member of the opposite sex. And to claim that because they love one another therefore they should be allowed to marry, is simply a redefining of what marriage is. To deny this is to deny the truth behind what the homosexual agenda is all about: not about being persecuted, but the demand that everyone applaud their behavior. This is something that the Christian cannot due, and for two reasons: (1) out of love for God and His truth; (2) out of love for the homosexual community.

You see, it is unloving towards homosexuals to openly endorse their sinful behavior. How can we, who claim to want what’s best for our fellow man, openly endorse a lifestyle contrary to the very core of how we are designed as human beings? We can’t, and also seriously claim to love them.

Miranda continued: “I don't want to start an argument, I just think you should put yourself in the position of a homosexual man, say someone told you that you couldn't marry Mindy for no other reason than it was morally wrong.You couldn't help the fact that you loved her and it would rip you to shreds inside. I'm not saying you have to change your beliefs, just asking you to allow someone to make that decision for themselves without being told they are wrong.”

At the core of the Christian worldview is the belief that one’s personal happiness is not the most important thing. I will say that again: one’s personal happiness is *not* the most important thing. This can mean that we may have desires or inclinations that are immoral to act upon. Here is an example: sometimes while driving I might be upset at someone who cut me off and I may think a thought of hitting them with my car. But … this is a sinful thought, and I thank God that He has restrained the evil within me from acting this way. My point is that just because one has a desire to do something, does not make that desire okay. Homosexuality is an example of an immoral desire.

You might ask: “Why is homosexuality considered immoral?” Answer: because God is the Creator and has designed how we should function, including our very sexuality. You cite John 8:7, and conclude that Christians are required to love sinners even though they are sinners. This is true, however, Christians are not to endorse sin or sinful lifestyles. Jesus actually addresses human sexuality in Matthew 19:3-6,

“3 Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” 4 And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, 5 and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate”” (Matthew 19:3-6, NASB, Caps is from the NASB).

Trying to trap the Lord Jesus, the Pharisees present Jesus with a silly question: can a man lawfully divorce his wife for any reason at all? Jesus’ response was to go back to Creation and remind them from the Bible how God created human beings. He cites Genesis that God “made them male and female” and “the two shall become one flesh.” Men and women were made as sexual beings for one another, and it is here that God ordained the institution of marriage.

It might seem obvious to some, but I will point it out anyway, … it is not one man and one man that become one flesh. It is not one woman and one woman who become one flesh. It is not two transgendered people who become one flesh. No, marriage is exclusively a relationship between one man and one woman.

Miranda added in a later post: “First of all, as a student in a university one of things we discuss is the problems with the Bible in regards to translation. Unfortunately many times some of the translations have been wrong and unless read in the original language and with knowledge of the slang of the time (something only well studied ancient historians have) some of the work has been altered. Another problem is that the Bible itself was altered after the original work was written.”

It is odd to me that you cite the Bible as an authority to remind us that Christians should love the ungodly, but then you attempt to discredit the Bible by attacking its authenticity. Based on your attack on its authenticity, I assume that you do not believe the Bible has been preserved through time or accurately translated? Furthermore, I assume you do not believe in what the Bible says? (If I am incorrect, please let me know). The issues you are raising are actually an area of particular interest to me, because I, like you, went through secular high school and university and was constantly faced with liberal presentations against the veracity of the Bible. I came to discover the field that deals with this subject is the field of textual criticism, which deals with how the Bible has been preserved and how it should be translated. The facts are these: from the many manuscript copies of the Bible that we today possess even the most liberal of scholars (such as Bart Ehrman) recognize that we actually have all of the original Bible. What liberals attempt to point out is that because of textual variants - which simply means that the copyists of the Bible did not produce photo-copies - that we can’t know what the original was.

To use a specific example, the New Testament is considered one of the greatest records among works of antiquity. There are approximately 5,600 manuscript copies of the Greek New Testament, which among the textual variants exist what the Bible originally said. These variants are actually a source of confidence because they provide the means by which the original is recognized, and this is done by textual criticism. Entire volumes have been written on the subject, but I would invite you to look at Bart Ehrman’s mentor, Bruce Metzger, … or even my own elder at church, Dr. James White, on the subject. If you do need a specific book to read, I would recommend “The King James Only Controversy” by Dr. White. It is an excellent introduction to the subject of Biblical textual criticism and the reliability of the Bible. Works by Metzger are likewise good reads.

When it comes to translation, the reputable English translations include the NASB, ESV, NIV, among others. But since the original has been preserved (and is documented as such from the manuscripts themselves), the translation is a matter performed usually by a committee. When in doubt, one can always check the translation using either the UBS or NA27 editions of the Greek New Testament. I, myself, have both, and know 2 years of New Testament Greek - it comes in handy in conversations like this =).

In another post, Miranda said: “As for your argument that Christianity is the only basis for morality I think this is very close-minded of you. There are many cultures around the world who do not share the Christian basis of morality and yet still have their own moral compass. Now, I know your argument was that God put morality in everyone, but there have been civilizations with morality long before the invention of Christianity.”

It is close-minded to believe that the Christian worldview is right and all others are wrong? I also wonder … close-minded as opposed to open-minded? And how would an open-minded person see things different than a Christian does? Like you see things? And how do you see things? Don’t you believe that the Christian worldview is not right about homosexuality, and that your worldview is correct? Could we not, on the same grounds as you, claim you are likewise “close-minded?”

My point is this: if claiming that what we believe is true and other viewpoints are false means we are close-minded, then so be it. But the fact remains that the Christian worldview does have a consistent worldview when it comes to interpreting the world around us, including morality. Why is it that other religions also express the same moral principles? Because, as you point out, the Bible discusses how God has written His moral requirements on the hearts of everyone. This is why there are moral standards in every society - even though some societies go to further lengths to suppress that truth in an unrighteous way.

Romans 1:18-22 talk about this: “18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools” (NASB).

I also wanted to point out that I agree with you that Christian morality existed long before Jesus Christ came into the world. In fact, it goes back before Christianity, before Judaism was established, all the way back to the moment of Creation. God’s moral standards were there in the beginning, and have been a moral standard ever since.

Miranda continued: “Besides, if we followed everything the Bible preached we would have things in our society we value as immoral. One of these, for example, is polygamy. King Solomon had many wives, and yet in our society we put people in jail for that sort of practice.”

King Solomon was also living in sin by taking on more than one wife. Did you know that the Bible never endorses Solomon for this, but demonstrates the severe consequences of taking on that many wives? The Bible’s revelation is very clear that marriage is between one man and one woman. Amazing as it is, God chose to preserve in His Word the good and the bad about His followers. Solomon did many good works in the name of God, but also many wicked things. To demonstrate this from Solomon’s own perspective, I would recommend to you the book that Solomon wrote: Ecclesiastes.

Miranda concluded this post by saying: “And as for our country being based upon the Christian faith, that is only partially true. While many of our founding fathers based their ideas of morality from Christianity, they also wanted to allow anyone the freedom to practice what they chose. If they wanted a country based upon religion they would have put it in the Constitution, very much like laws that were in place in the countries of Europe at the time. If you read some of the writings of our founding fathers this idea becomes very clear, many of these I have read and encourage anyone wanting to find the basis of our country to read them for themselves.”

The United States being based upon Christian principles is “only partially true”? It is overwhelmingly true. The first immigrants - and many later immigrants - came to the New World to have the right to freedom of religious expression. Which religion was that? … the Christian religion. Entire colonies were created with the express purpose of being a light to the world of how a true Christian society ought to live. Once we arrive at the time of the American Revolution, it was led and founded by men with intense Protestant Christian backgrounds. In fact, the basis for the “unalienable rights” was a gift from “their Creator.” These rights were derived from “Nature’s God” and is the basis for which all men were “created equal” before one another.

John Adams, the man who believed in a nation of laws, firmly believed that our government ought to be based on justice with a foundation resting on Christian principles. It would be an understatement to say that the Constitution was written with Biblical principles in mind, especially those of the 10 Commandments, and the Law of God found elsewhere in the Bible. Even the few Deists (such as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin) that signed the Constitution and contributed to the founding of our nation, believed firmly in upholding a Christian worldview, or at the least, Christian morality. The idea that homosexuality would ever be applauded as something acceptable, much less to be included in the definition of marriage would be out of the question.

Why do Scott and I care about the subject of homosexuality, marriage, “homosexual marriage,” and other family values? Because we care about our fellow man, but we love our God even more. The most important thing for the Christian is to serve His Lord faithfully by embracing the truth He has revealed and proclaiming it to the world. We are sinners, just as homosexuals (and all people) are sinners, and we recognize that we are no better. As we are born into this world, we all deserve death, to face the judgment of God, and to be sent to Hell to pay for offending God’s Law. But as Christians we have been delivered from the consequences and the slavery of sin because of our faith in Jesus Christ and what He did on earth 2000 years ago. We have a positive message of hope for sinners, and we cannot budge on this point. To budge on the issue of marriage would be asking us to deny our faith, and the Christian cannot do this.

 

But we do want to be loving enough to our friends and our family to warn them of the dangers of sin, and the consequences of sin. For example, the Apostle Paul discusses how homosexuality (among other things) is a display of God’s judgment on society and on individuals:

Romans 1:24-27: “24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.” (NASB).

This is why, out of love for people, and love for God we warn others of the consequences of sin and encourage others to turn from their sinful ways and embrace the truth of Jesus Christ.

Thank you for reading,

Do What is Pleasing to the Lord

What were you thinking?! Have you ever found yourself asking this question while listening to someone speak or while reading a letter? My pastor was clever enough to ask this question of the Apostle Paul (without any negative implications) as we examined Romans 6:1, "What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?" (NASB). The answer is an obvious "nuh-uh," but I never before thought to ask myself the reason why Paul addressed this issue. It seems reasonable to assume that he spends time discussing this because there were those who had crept into the church defending the idea of going on sinning because more grace would be given.

One of the odd things you begin to notice as a Christian is the temptation to embrace this line of thinking. I will never be able to prove this (until Heaven) but I have sneaking suspicion that this is one of the Devil's favorite means of tempting believers to sin. Maybe it is just my own personal experience, but I have had to fight this kind of thinking for my entire walk with the Lord. I work hard at hating this kind of reasoning because it is deadly to the one who wants nothing more than to do what pleases God.

Again, maybe it is just me again, but I have a difficult time relating to those who have no problem continuing on in their sinful ways and lifestyle. Why is it that some professing Christians are able to comfortably remain in sin? I would suggest to you that it is one of two things: (1) they are Christians who have strayed, and as my pastor says, "strayed into the far country;" or (2) they were never Christians to begin with and will always be more comfortable in sin and darkness.

"For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace" (Romans 6:14, NASB). How is it that Paul can make such a grand statement? Because Christians were present with Jesus Christ as he died on the cross and rose again. How exactly were we present? Not in time and space, but in a representative way. You see, Christ is the believer's representative and therefore we died with Him and rose with Him. In fact, positionally we are with Christ in the heavens: "and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:6, NASB). This brings me back to Romans 6:14: sin is not our master any longer! This is wonderful to consider because even though Christians continue to sin, when we sin it is as free people who hate such actions and seek godliness. Before Christ we were slaves to sin and had no choice but to sin.

The other extreme to those who believe in continuing to sin because of God's never-ending grace, is the perspective that Roman Catholics have: grace-plus-works based salvation. Most conversations I've had with Roman Catholics about Justification have gone something like this:

Me: "Romans 3:21-28 clearly demonstrate that justification is by grace alone through faith alone, apart from any works at all."

Roman Catholic: "Since you believe you're justified by faith alone, what's to stop you from sinning and living however you want to?"

Me: "Justification is through faith alone, but Christians do good works out of love for what Christ has done for them. Said another way, we are justified by faith alone, but a true faith is never alone."

Inevitably these conversations always wind up at Romans 6, and I've pointed out to more than one Roman Catholic that chapter 6 is preceded by chapters 3 and 4. Is it any wonder that those who yet remain in their sins adopt the argument Paul is here refuting? We have to be careful because it is not a matter of being a moderate between those who continue to sin because of grace, and works-righteousness. By a complete contrast, the gospel really is good news because justification is not dependent on good works that we perform. Yet at the same time, once we are justified we are to do good works. Both of these points are vital to the Christian understanding of the gospel and to the life we are to live.

Christian, spend your time trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord (Ephesians 5:10), for this is the fruit of the Light of the gospel (Ephesians 5:9).