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).

The Sin of Inconvenience

Politics. Politics is something I can discuss with someone from an opposite perspective, and I am able to do so with a patient approach. Baseball is something else I can do that with ... even those Yankees fans. In fact, I'm pretty patient towards the vast majority of things that would fall under the umbrella of religious discussion. But last week I discovered a topic that I do not have it in me to take a patient approach. That issue is abortion.

A friend of Emily's (and a new friend of mine) posted the following picture on facebook:

 

I'm not a huge facebook-er, but I do try to skim it from time to time, and this managed to show up in my feed (which is quite a feat considering I only subscribe to close friends and family). I remember casually taking note of the picture thinking to myself: "good stuff," and then I saw there were multiple comments left. Curiosity got the best of me, and I was compelled to see what all the rage was about. The first few were what I expected: Christians offering their rightful agreement. Last, and awkwardly was a comment left by a pro-abortionist picking a fight with the grammar, and trying to point out inconsistencies of Christians who don't likewise mourn for the loss of skin-cells that die every day. 

My trusty HTC Incredible Android phone was where I first stumbled upon the soon-to-be warzone, so the comment I left was 140-ish characters which read: "Heh, the point that was missed is that western culture would go nuts over a single cell plant life on mars ... But has such a disregard for human life that it fails to recognize the value and dignity deserving of unborn babies."

Heidi-the-abortionist and I went back and forth a few times, and the conversation came to an abrupt halt when I pointed out the absurdity of her arguments. I was not willing to budge on the fact that human life, from the moment of conception is valuable and has inherent dignity because we are created in God's image. Quickly I pointed to Psalm 139:13, "For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb." 

I am offended at the fact that abortions happen at all, but I am incensed that anyone would dare presume to defend such actions. Let's be honest for a moment: abortion is nothing less than murdering the unborn, those who have not yet had the chance to take their first breath. How can abortion not make you outraged? There is no argument I will accept - and can hardly stand to listen to - because there is no excusing the murder of an unborn baby who is an inconvenience on you. I would rather spend hours listening to Latter-day Saints defending that they can become gods than the pathetic arguments defending abortion.

From the abortionist's perspective I suppose the unborn have committed one unforgivable crime: the sin of inconvenience. To the pro-abortionist I would like to ask: who do you think you are that you believe your happiness and ... life ... is more important than an innocent unborn life? True, babies are likewise guilty of the sin of Adam, but before other men they are innocent of all crimes. 

The Christian must recognize the value of all human life, even those that are helpless and cannot contribute to society. This includes much more than the unborn, such as the mentally retarded, those will serious diseases, the handicapped and otherwise disabled, and the elderly. Life is a gift from God and it is to be regarded as such. The Psalmist writes: "I lay down and slept; I awoke, for the LORD sustains me" (Psalm 3:5, NASB). It was the Lord who created life, and it is the Lord who sustains everything that lives. Maybe it is the fact that I am a new father and still vividly remember seeing the first ultrasound of my little Molly in the womb of my beautiful wife, but I can't help but think that any argument defending abortion is a ridiculous one. 

50 million abortions, according to the Centers for Disease Control have been legally performed in the United States since 1973. Fifty. Million. Can you try to comprehend that number of people being murdered? I can't, and it breaks my heart to think that it would have been a protected right had Emily and I decided to abort Molly. Disgusting. 

All I can say to the pro-abortionist is: shame on you for defending murder of the most innocent and the most helpless in American society. American culture would do well to listen carefully to the words of Christ: "...unless you repent, you will all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3, NASB). Amen, and may the Ruler of heaven and earth grant our nation the ability to turn from our wickedness and to the true and living God.

Broccoli, Among Other Things

"Could you define the market -- everybody has to buy food sooner or later, so you define the market as food, therefore, everybody is in the market; therefore, you can make people buy broccoli." - Supreme Court Justice Scalia.

Broccoli was mentioned more than once in today's case regarding President Obama's health care law, each time putting the law in an unfavorable light. Twenty-six states in the Union have brought their case to the Supreme Court in hopes of overturning ObamaCare. Al Mohler said it best this morning on his webcast that this might be the most important Supreme Court case in a generation. I mentioned the court case to a coworker today, who seemed beyond disinterested, to which I asked him if he knew the impact - either way - of the court's decision.

If the law is upheld we will first notice a decrease in the size of our wallets. Paychecks will be lower because all of our health insurance is going up. Everyone know this. The 30+ million people who will suddenly be covered under ObamaCare are not receiving coverage from private insurers out of the goodness of their hearts. No-siree-Bob. You and I will be picking up the tab on these millions of new subscribers.

Liberty is the real underlying issue that Democrats won't touch with a ten foot pole. If ObamaCare is upheld, our personal freedom and liberty to make these decisions for ourselves will be stripped away. We will be required to buy insurance for ourselves, regardless of whether we want it or not. Then the question becomes: is there anything the government can't tell us to buy? This is the precise argument made by Justice Scalia: if the government can compel us to buy private insurance, what's stopping them from compelling us to buy broccoli? 

Justice Kennedy: "And here the government is saying that the Federal Government has a duty to tell the individual citizen that it must act, and that is different from what we have in previous cases, and that changes the relationship of the Federal Government to the individual in a very fundamental way."

and

Chief Justice Roberts: Well, the same, it seems to me, would be true, say, for the market in emergency services: police, fire, ambulance, roadside assistance, whatever. You don't know when you're going to need it; you're not sure that you will. But the same is true for health care. You don't know if you're going to need a heart transplant or if you ever will. So, there's a market there. In some extent, we all participate in it. So, can the government require you to buy a cell phone because that would facilitate responding when you need emergency services? You can just dial 911 no matter where you are? (Bold MINE).

Mr. Verrilli (defending the Obama gov't) was repeatedly interrupted by the various Supreme Court Justices, and I gotta hand it to the guy because it must have been difficult making a case with such interruptions. However, this was to be expected in this extreme example of a law which would be one of the greatest expansions of government and reductions of personal liberty.

The argument was made by Mr. Verrilli, and indirectly supported by other Democratic Justices, that what makes the individual mandate (requiring everyone to buy insurance) different from saying one must buy another private product is that everyone else pays the bill for the uninsured. Holes were shot throughout this argument by the Supreme Court with other examples:

Justice Alito: "All right. Suppose that you and I walked around downtown Washington at lunch hour and we found a couple of healthy young people and we stopped them and we said: You know what you're doing? You are financing your burial services right now because eventually you're going to die, and somebody is going to have to pay for it, and if you don't have burial insurance and you haven't saved money for it, you're going to shift the cost to somebody else. Isn't that a very artificial way of talking about what somebody is doing?"

Mr. Verrilli responded by stating he believes it is "completely different" because "you don't have the cost shifting to other market participants."

Justice Alito: "I don't see the difference. You can get burial insurance. You can get health insurance. Most people are going to need health care, almost everybody. Everybody is going to be buried or cremated at some point ... because if you don't have money, then the State is going to pay for it or some ... A family member is going to pay for it."

Is that not brilliant or what? Never in a hundred years would I have come up with such a spot-on example. In fact, it is almost too perfect. Both are forms of insurance; both are examples of expenses that might be passed on to others if provisions aren't taken in advance.

On a personal note, the sad reality surrounding this debate is that there are serious problems with our current health care system. In between jobs health insurance might be up in the air. It is expensive. Many fellow citizens ... good, upstanding citizens ... are without insurance for understandable reasons. We need to find a meaningful solution to this problem. But the solution is not to take away our freedom of choice, or by indirectly punishing those of us who have responsibly purchased insurance which will ultimately create a single-payer system. All the insurance companies know this is what will happen; it is inevitable.

Rivaling for first place as my favorite quote from this lengthy exchange is the following quote:

Justice Kennedy: "Well, then your question is whether or not there are any limits on the Commerce Clause. Can you identify for us some limits on the Commerce Clause?"

Something about a Supreme Court Justice asking a lawyer to identify some limits of the government regarding the Commerce Clause just rubs me the right way. Try and picture this scene. I'm laughing it's so funny to me.

But honestly, this question is one of the key questions so far in the proceedings. Are there any limitations on government? Or can it make Americans buy anything? This is a fair question, and as much as Democrats don't want to go there they should wake up and smell the coffee. Open your eyes and notice that this isn't a little game of politics we're playing - this would affect every single American. It would take away more of our liberty and even more money by means of taxation!

I will close with this inspiring quote from Justice Scalia:

"The argument here is that this also is -- may be necessary, but it's not proper, because it violates an equally evident principle in the Constitution, which is that the Federal Government is not supposed to be a government that has all powers; that it's supposed to be a government of limited powers. And that's what all this questioning has been about. What -- what is left? If the government can do this, what -- what else can it not do?" (Bold MINE).

Thanks for reading,
Rustypth

City on a Hill

Do you cuss? Do you get drunk? Do you think it's funny to entertain sexually explicit jokes? Do you easily blend in with American culture? Last question: do you claim to be a Christian?

Like the Cookie Monster points out: one of these things is not like the others. Cussing, drunkenness, sexual jokes, and today's culture do not jive with authentic Christianity. Yet I am seeing more and more people who call themselves Christians doing these things without shame. Now, I am a Christian and I am not perfect and am certainly guilty of doing some of these things at one time or another. But I make it a habit not to do them, and it seems many professing Christians have no problem with these sinful behaviors.

I don't know about you, but it is becoming a pet peeve of mine when I see Christians acting this way. Oddly enough, these folks don't typically hang around me very long because I tend to hold them to a Biblical standard of morality =). Why do I even care about the actions of others? Because the Bible spends a great deal of time talking about our behavior, and how we are to act in this life.

¹ And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, ² in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. ³ Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.

Ephesians 2 must be one of my favorite selections from Scripture. In these verses the Apostle Paul uses the past tense to describe how the genuine Christian used to be. Notice: "you were dead in your trespasses and sins," and "you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air," and "we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind." It is true that the Christian has been saved, once and for all, from the consequences of sin - verses 4-9 speak about this. But God's plan of salvation does not end there. Continuing to verse 10:

¹⁰ For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

The Lord was kind and merciful towards His people in saving them from their sins because He loves them. But this is not the only reason He saved sinners from their sins. God's primary reason is for His own glory (Ephesians 1:6), so that in saving us we might be a testimony to His marvelous grace. This is done by good works. Do you remember what the Lord Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount:

Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven. (Matthew 5:16, NASB).

Current statistics show that 1/4 of Americans consider themselves Evangelical Christians, which is the single largest percentage of any country in the world. Why then is the gospel not clearly known in our land? I would suggest to you it is because many of those professing to be Christians are not really Christians. For many people today Christianity is a social networking opportunity. Let's be honest: Christians are nice people to be around because they are accepting of all kinds of people. This is how it ought to be ... but with a clear and bold proclamation of the gospel calling people to turn from their wicked ways unto the only One who can save them from their sins and sinful lifestyle.

In my own personal experience, especially recently, I have met professing Christians who regularly do the aforementioned sins and have no shame whatsoever. It always leaves a bad taste in my mouth because instead of shining light for the world they increase the darkness. What angers me most of all about these kinds of people is that when they attach the name of Christ to these sinful behaviors it makes it difficult for those of us trying to set a godly example to further the testimony of the gospel.

What is our responsibility when we encounter these kinds of professing Christians? Should we say something? Should we offer correction? I believe the answer is a resounding yes! First, however, one ought to examine his own life to make sure he isn't guilty of the same thing. Second, we should approach the professing Christian in private and politely offer correction to our brother. Matthew 18 is the go-to passage for this.

How about when you do your due diligence to offer correction and it is refused? Thankfully, Matthew 18 also addresses this. You are to bring another brother with you to confront the individual. At that point if he still refuses to obey the Scriptures it could be that he is not a true Christian to begin with. The times I have corrected someone with Scripture and the response is vehement opposition I am left wondering about that person's salvation.

Ultimately it is God alone who knows the hearts and minds of people so I cannot make an infallible judgment about one's position before God. What Scripture does make clear is that we can determine whether someone is genuinely a Christian based on their works:

You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? (Matthew 7:16, NASB)

and

By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother. (1 John 3:10, NASB)

We cannot have an infallible or perfect knowledge of someone's salvation, but we can have a reasonable assurance one way or the other. So when you see someone comfortable in their sin, it is reasonable to assume they may not be truly born again. Prior to this, John makes the point that anyone who practices sin (as opposed to struggling against sin) is not truly a Christian (1 John 3:8-9). The Christian wants to live a godly life to please and honor God. He also loves his brother and should want to come along side to gently spur one another on towards love and good deeds (Hebrews 10:24). Correcting our brother should never be about boasting rights, neither should it stem from an arrogant attitude of superiority. Don't you want your brother in the Lord to likewise be pleasing to God in all that he does?

I was telling my wife the other day that I believe as time goes on, and our nation steps further into ungodliness, we will see many of these false Christians openly abandon the faith altogether. In the meantime, we should always be ready to stand firm in our clear proclamation of the gospel that has saved us from the consequences and the lifestyle of sin. We are a city on a hill that the world needs to see.

Thanks for reading,
Rusty

The Existence of God: Part 1 – The Nature of Evidence and Why Logic?

The above image (source found here) is a classic example of modern secular thinking. Christians are irrational, illogical and unreasonable. They are fools for believing in God and even more foolish for the belief that this Jesus person is the incarnation of God. Atheists, in recent years, have taken the gloves off. They are no longer engaging in polite discourse. Although religion as a whole is under attack, it is Christians who bear the brunt. To find the truth of this statement one simply need only to spend a few minutes on any popular website or public forum such as reddit or facebook. The vast majority of the atheist venom is directed specifically toward the bible, the God of the bible, Jesus and His followers. They have taken the disagreement to the level of mockery and complete intolerance for the Christian perspective. They say belief in God is a psychological crutch for simpletons, unable to handle reality. And why is the Christian so mock-worthy? According to them, evidence contradicts the bible. 

Atheists argue that the evidence against the biblical perspective on origins specifically - but other matters as well - is overwhelming. The universe and life both have “natural” origins; therefore existence itself is not a proof of God. They take this perspective even further. The claim is that science precludes the existence of God. You cannot use God as an explanation for anything in science. In other words, science can’t prove or disprove God and if it can’t be accounted for scientifically it does not exist. Although this line of thinking is full of baseless presuppositions, I’m not going to specifically address those issues at this time, but I will address them (Lord willing) in a future article that will examine the atheist world view in a more general sense. For now we will look at two of atheism’s most basic foundations.

The second biggest (we will get to the biggest in a moment) problem with atheism is its reliance on evidence. Evidence does not prove anything. Much like beauty, evidence is in the eye of the beholder. In other words, evidence must be interpreted, and one must have a framework or basis for how they choose to interpret evidence. This is called a world view. Two quick examples of why we cannot use evidence to prove anything. The atheist will point to starlight and say something like, 

“That starlight you see is billions of lightyears away, so it took billions of years to get here. The bible only allows for the universe to be thousands of years old, not billions. The bible is wrong.”

The Christian might respond,

“You assume too much. Perhaps light has not always traveled at its current rate. Perhaps there is some unknown past cosmic event, or property of the universe that we don’t yet know or understand that could account for such a phenomenon. In fact there are Christian physicists working on that problem right now.”

Then the Christian will say,

“Look at comets. Each time they pass by the sun they lose some of their material. Even by the most generous calculations comets can only last for thousands of years, not even close to millions or billions of years. We still see comets today orbiting the sun, so the universe is only thousands of years old. The bible is right.”

Now the atheist can say,

“Well this guy named Oort came up with the idea of the Oort cloud. It’s a cloud of billions of comets around the solar system, and every once in a while there is some kind of gravitational event that throws more comets our way.”

Now I should point out that there is absolutely no reason to believe in the existence of the Oort cloud other than the fact that we still have comets orbiting the sun, just like Christians do not yet have an explanation for distant starlight. You see both sides can argue over evidence all day long, but we will only endlessly come up with reasons why the other's evidence does not affect our world views. Everyone has a world view, and they interpret everything on the basis of that world view. So our task - as the human race in the search for truth - is quite simple, examine the different world views and find the one that makes the most logical sense. But that leads to one very important question, why logic?

Proponent of atheism Dr. Gordon Stein has said, “The use of logic or reason is the only valid way to examine the truth or falsity of a statement which claims to be factual.” In other words, logic is the most fundamental rule by which we measure truth. You can’t prove anything without logic or reason. This is actually something Christians and atheists agree upon. The problem with this standard for truth is that it is in-and-of itself a claim of truth. So the atheist has to now prove by logic and reason, that it is by logic and reason that you prove everything. This is circular reasoning and begging the question, two logical fallacies that prove an argument to be false. The only option left for the atheist is to prove - by some method other than logic or reason - that it is by logic and reason that you prove everything. In which case, they destroy the argument on its own foundation. This is an inescapable trap and the biggest problem with atheism. The atheist perspective on its most basic foundation is totally irrational and self-refuting. The reason for this is that the atheist perspective cannot account for the existence of logic, so they have no logical reason for the use of logic and reason.  According to their own standards, science must be able to account for something for it to exist. But there is no “logic particle” or “planet logic” beaming logic (like radio waves) into the universe. But don’t Christians have the same problem? No they don’t, because their world view can account for logic and give a reason why it must be used. Logic is a reflection of God’s thinking. God is logical, and therefore logic is the standard by which we must think. To do otherwise violates God’s law and is therefore irrational. The same can be demonstrated with all non-physical properties of the universe such as morality and the laws of nature.

In closing there are four ways atheists try to get out of the logical trap their world view creates for them. The first is to try and say matter is logical therefore logic is a property of matter. There are two problems with this argument; the first is that matter changes and logic does not. If logic was based off of matter it would change. The second problem with this is that matter obeys the laws of logic and nature, laws do not obey matter therefore it cannot be the source. 

The second method of escape is to say the laws of logic are like the rules of grammar. They are not laws they are simply conventions among people. If that were true then logic would be different from culture to culture. For instance, in England it might make sense for me to contradict myself and say I am 100% a person and 100% not a person. 

The third escape is to say logic is created by chemical reactions in our brain. It is just how the human mind works. The first problem with this is that people are not always logical. That is why there are logical fallacies. If it was just how the human mind worked we would not have to be taught how to be logical. The second problem with this is that what happens in your brain is not what happens in mine. It is similar to the “matter source” and “conventions” arguments. Logic would then be changeable.

Finally they might try to say something along the lines of, “Just because you can prove something logically does not mean it actually exists.” This is referring, of course, to God. This is not really a method of escape, but rather an attack on the overall argument. What I say to this (and the three methods of escape in general) is that it is the atheist who is forced to deny and attack logic … not the Christian. It is not Christians who have to diminish logic or rational thought to try and uphold their world view. Christians can account for, or give a reason for, the use of logic. The atheist cannot. In fact in the rational world the atheist can’t prove anything because they have absolutely no basis for logic or any other kind of truth. They borrow from the Christian world view to try and fill in the gaps of their world view. The atheist world view is clearly inconsistent and irrational.

In part 2 (eta, soonish) we will broaden our view and tackle the atheist claim of neutrality, and the naturalist world view.

The Most Awful Place I've Been

Las Vegas and I met for the first time and after only one weekend I abruptly ended the relationship with a phone call. There was no salvaging what we had, because from the beginning she proved utterly sinful and ruthless to the bitter end.

Gambling is a sin, but because that [radical?] idea deserves its own entry, I won't venture into those waters quite yet. But yes, gambling is a sin, so before I even went to Vegas I made the decision not to gamble. What was I going to do there? I was planning to eat some good food, see some shows, museums and other attractions. What I actually saw was some of the most vile wickedness crammed into the few square miles of that forsaken city.

Hotels are really the upper echelons meant for housing gamblers for the massive casinos. The sheer amount of effort and creativity in designing the various casinos is brilliant, both inside and out. Bright lights enshrine every single slot machine, accompanied by enticing sounds for each and every play. Chairs are only to be found for those actually gambling, and if you lose money long enough free alcoholic beverages are brought to you. It is a sad sight to see people lose money, which is really what casinos are designed to do. Even more depressing is watching the elderly spend money in the vain hope that they might become instant winners.

The cherry on top for me was when a dancer got up on a platform and started dancing a few feet away. I was utterly disgusted and deeply offended at the sight of this girl wearing stripper's clothing. Her whole job was to cause men to lust after her long enough to stay and continue wasting money at the casinos. At this moment I had had enough and walked out of the casino. With tears in my eyes that I refused to let fall, I found my way to some steps outside and sat down. I still cannot believe that this girl's entire role in the casino is to sell herself to attract more customers. She is selling her dignity, and everyone in the casino is supporting her in ruining her life while she in turn helps ruin the lives of others.

When I sat down on the steps I looked across the street only to find an ad on a large truck with nearly naked girls with the slogan: "Get hot girls now" and included a phone number. I looked down at the ground and found more nudity scattered on fliers littering the sidewalk advertising for strip clubs and escorts/prostitutes. There was nowhere for my eyes to wander: not inside the hotels, outside and even at the ground! To add to the perversity, every 50 feet or so stands distributors of the aforementioned fliers ready to add to everyone's misery.

Drunkards were in every hotel and in public. They fell over, puked in public, and many looked over-tired and in bad shape. It was not uncommon for vacationing women to dress as scandalously as possible - I wondered if there was a competition to be the least dressed?

My conclusion: this is no place for the Christian. I naively traveled there thinking that I would be able to avoid much of what "Sin City" had to offer. I should have known better. Certainly, it is possible to have a better experience than I had if one avoids the casinos altogether, and is extremely purposeful in going to shows and other forms of appropriate attractions. But at some point you will have to travel around the city or be in public, so it will be difficult to avoid much of what I've described. I told Emily I will never go back unless it is for missionary work to spread the gospel. How sad it is that Americans go to Vegas for a weekend to get away and have a good time. Now that I have seen what Sin City is all about with my own eyes, I will actually feel bad when I hear of people going to Vegas.

One of my elders preached a sermon years ago from Psalm 12 that has always remained with me, and it is a good expression of how I feel post-Vegas:

¹ Help, LORD, for the godly man ceases to be,
For the faithful disappear from among the sons of men.
² They speak falsehood to one another;
With flattering lips and with a double heart they speak.
³ May the LORD cut off all flattering lips,
The tongue that speaks great things;
⁴ Who have said, “With our tongue we will prevail;
Our lips are our own; who is lord over us?”
⁵ “Because of the devastation of the afflicted, because of the groaning of the needy,
Now I will arise,” says the LORD; “I will set him in the safety for which he longs.”

 ⁶ The words of the LORD are pure words;
As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times.
⁷ You, O LORD, will keep them;
You will preserve him from this generation forever.
⁸ The wicked strut about on every side
When vileness is exalted among the sons of men.

(Psalm 12, NASB)

Forward-Thinking

What?! How long? Only a measly 9 months left to go. No, no, we're not having another kid ... yet. I'm talking about the national election, and I admit that I'm overjoyed and worried at the same time. Overjoyed at the thought of our union transitioning from one administration to another - if you take my meaning - and simtaneously worried because I don't have enough faith in people to make the right decision. After all, we voted for our current President once, whose to say we won't do it again?

On the one hand, Barack Obama won't have an easy campaign because he can't run on his record. His policies have made him one of the most liberal presidents in United States history, the most noteworthy being his mandating nationalized healthcare. On the other hand, there's the American people, which means anything can happen. Ever since I started paying attention to politics and the national scene I've heard the same message every election: "This is the most important election of your lifetime!" What's worse is that I *think* I agree with this. Bush/Gore ... Bush/Kerry ... Obama/McFail-RINO (I mean, McCain).

This go-round it feels more urgent. What's at stake is more important to me than the ever-present threat of international terrorism. Our current President stands for everything I am opposed to as a Christian man. He generally believes that government can fix any problem and has a right to interfere in all aspects of our lives. Healthcare has been nationalized, which will add to the deficit. While he gives lip-service to marriage, he speaks out of both sides of his mouth by promoting same-sex "marriage" and homosexual super-rights. The cherry on top for me has been the recent attempt to side-step the First Amendment by making us pay for abortion pills via ObamaCare.

To say that I am "outraged" would only be a part of how I feel, but perhaps "worried" would be a better term altogether. I am worried that the government will try to force me to pay for someone else to have an abortion, to murder someone's unborn child. God did a marvelous act of grace in giving to us our nation's founding fathers who had the vision to create our Constitution and Bill of Rights. This is the only deterrent that will [hopefully] stop this kind of utter madness. Freedom of Religion means I have the right to practice my religion, and cannot be forced to go against my religious convictions.

But all the Democrats claim they hear from Republicans is: "You want to stop women from having access to all forms of birth-control?!" Anyone else a little annoyed that this is all they can focus on? No one is saying women shouldn't use birth control - although some of us are saying abortion, which is a disguised name for "murder," should be illegal. The real issue is that those of us who believe abortion is murder should not be forced to pay for someone else to commit murder. It really is that simple. Yet it continues to amaze me at how deaf they are to our concerns.

Emily and I prayed tonight that the Lord might grant to our culture repentance from the ungodly direction we're running down. We are running towards utter ruin, and I don't mean to sound pessimistic; it's the truth. Only the living God can do such a work in American society. I pray for the sake of my wife and daughter, my friends, my coworkers, and my acquaintances that God radically shifts American culture back towards godliness.

Forward-thinking is something I've noticed people are lacking today, and not just financial planning. People are so caught up in themselves, after all ... everyone believes he/she is the most important person in the universe. Personal happiness trumps duty, responsibility and morality ... every time. But now, as a father, I fully understand the need to think forward. I want my daughter to grow up in a society she can be proud of - not one that continues to increase in decadence, depravity and sinfulness. I want so bad for her to be safe as a [hopefully] Christian woman who has the freedom to openly serve Christ in this world. The thought of her having to face government persecution because of her [potential future] Christian life breaks my heart.

Now, I'm saying this as a Christian father concerned for his daughter, and for the future of the nation that I love. Roman authorities were the church's first experience which offered centuries of persecution. By God's free grace we don't have similar experiences to that of Roman persecution, but it is my prayer we never get to that point. Al Mohler said in his webcast this week that religious freedom should never be taken for granted. It is not inherently guaranteed in this world, and we should stand firm for our right to practice our Christian faith - and not just at church, but in the public square as well.

Whatever the Lord sees fit to have happen, we know we are required to submit to the governing authorities that rule over us (Romans 13) and trust in the promise that whatever happens to the Christian has been ordained by God as the best thing for him. It is because of God's promise that I may rest easy because my daughter's future has been predetermined by God, as well as the nation's. "And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose" (Romans 8:28, NASB).

We Have Experienced An Act of God

How do you let someone know you have something important to tell them? Do you try to preface what you are about to say, or do you jump right into it? As a Christian, husband and a father, I find myself in this very predicament. I have something important to tell you, my reading audience; but I want to be sure to have your full attention because what I have to say today means a lot to me. 

There are sermons, and there are sermons that stick with you. This past Lord’s Day morning, one of our elders preached a sermon that had a profound impact on me and my wife. James preached from Matthew 19:1-6,

When Jesus had finished these words, He departed from Galilee and came into the region of Judea beyond the Jordan; and large crowds followed Him, and He healed them there. Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, 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’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

Having heard Dr. White preach on this text a few times already, I thought I was prepared for what I was about to hear. Little did I know that this would turn out to be my favorite sermon. 
 
James sought to answer the question of why Christians believe marriage is what it is. Early on he directly addressed those ages 12-25, during which my wife and I smiled at each other because we can no longer be included in that age-group =). He spoke to this age-group because according to some polls 70% of their generation believes same-sex marriage is an acceptable form of marriage. Is it any wonder that many are saying it is inevitable that all 50 states will soon legalize same-sex marriage? You know something … unless our youngest generation has a change of heart I would have to agree with that statement. 
 
I don’t want to discount God’s ability to change the culture, or to change the spiritual condition of an entire generation. Without the Lord’s intervention it appears these things are bound to happen. James was not trying to be an alarmist; after all, this is the discussion happening now in our society. 
 
Our culture demands that we embrace the idea that all opinions are equal. But for the Christian this is impossible because we know not all opinions are equal. Oh sure, everyone has a right to his own perspective, but the Christian cannot accept that there is more than one correct view of marriage. God has spoken clearly in His Word about what marriage is, and we need to be ready and willing to give a defense when the opportunity arises. Matthew 19 is a remarkable selection from Scripture because Jesus is asked a ridiculous question and responds with a beautiful defense of what marriage is. 
 
This gem of a question is what prompts the entire discussion: “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” Isn’t that lovely? Can we get divorced for any reason at all? Christ’s brilliant response directs the questioner back to the source of truth: the Scriptures. Might I suggest that this should be our approach as well. When we encounter non-Christians on the subject of marriage we should be quick to go to the Scriptures. 
 
Jesus then cites from Genesis 1 and 2, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, 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’?” From the beginning of creation God made them male and female. This was a part of God’s creative design for human beings. He created gender, and it was good. 
 
A man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife in marriage. It is worth mentioning, a man does not leave his father and father, or mother and mother. He leaves his father and mother, indicating the truth that from one generation to another marriage remains the same. 
 
Today, the amount of gender confusion is disturbing! We hear stories of parents allowing their young children to undergo sex-change operations because they believe their physical gender is not their true identity. The two genders are equal in value but not equal in identity. Male is not the equivalent of the female gender – but you best be careful because saying this in our society will reward you with accusations of hate speech. How sad it is that our culture fails to recognize men and women are different – equal but not the same. 
 
“So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” Who is it that becomes one flesh in marriage? One man and one woman. This is a divine institution … the first divine institution, in fact. But what we are hearing today is the cry that everyone should have the right to marry whomever they wish! Do they really mean that? Can and should marriage mean whatever anyone wants it to mean, or does it have an inherent meaning derived from the Creator? 
 
Absurd as it sounds, there are men who would marry multiple women, women who would marry multiple men, same-sex marriages, human beings marrying animals, adults marrying children, incestuous marriages, and other variations that I am unable to imagine. Should our approach be, “Well, if that’s how they want to do marriage, that’s fine”? The Christian cannot have this attitude. God is the Creator of human beings, of gender, and of marriage. 
 
Any change from God’s design relating to gender identity or marriage can only bring about disastrous results. We saw what God did to Sodom and Gomorrah … can we expect anything different for America if we continue down this path? 
 
By the goodness of our God we have a breathtaking message to share with this lost and dying world. The Christian who is married has such an opportunity to explain the message of Christ because we have experienced an act of God. As a man who is married to a godly and beautiful woman, I can personally attest to how wonderful it is to experience Christian marriage. Both the man and the woman have differing impacts upon the other, but both are complementary toward one another. I have experienced the tempering affects of a woman upon me – how I spend my time, my outlook on life, making me less selfish, and the desire to be a better man. 
 
This kind of relationship cannot be accomplished with two members of the same sex. Well … why? Because it is like having a relationship with a mirror. A mirror-image of yourself is not a complementary relationship. Can’t a same-sex couple love each other, and shouldn’t they be able to marry? God is the Creator and sustainer of life, so He alone has the right to define what love is and how it is to be expressed. He clearly says in the Bible that men and women were created to marry, and not 2 of the same gender. 
 
Should Christians live and let live, and keep their mouths shut? Consider this: how is it loving to see our friends, family and coworkers living a devastating homosexual lifestyle and not offer to show them the God-designed way to happiness and peace? 
 
James made one final point that I want to pass along: when our society sees Christian couples married for 20 … 30 … 40 years, this is a wonderful testimony of Jesus Christ. It is a living, breathing demonstration of God’s goodness in marriage and ultimately of the saving power of the gospel. My prayer for myself and my wife (grammar alert?) is that we might have marriages as long-lasting as each of our parents, who have set this godly example. 
 
Christians today have opportunities to share the gospel, as we have throughout the ages – today, these opportunities might stem from conversations about the goodness of God in marriage. Always be ready.