[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,
