Archive for the ‘biblical worldview’ Category


Can A Leopard Change His Spots?

Jeremiah 13:23

“Can the Ethiopian change his skin

Or the leopard his spots?

Then you also can do good

Who are accustomed to doing evil.”

Here is a pastor’s perspective that Pastor Edward, a graduate from TMS and a pastor from Southern CA (www.anaheimcommunitychurch.org), wrote concerning the LGBT movement.  We pray that this piece will help stimulate your mind and encourage you to be Christ’s witnesses to a dark world.

We as humans are used to change. We find change to be both positive and negative. Often change is sought to modify a situation of dissatisfaction. For instance…

We have gained weight…we change our diet and exercise.

Our automobiles begin to wear out…we sell the old and buy a new car.

Our family grows and our house is cramped…we sell the old smaller house and buy a newer larger house.

If we do not like our physical appearance…we alter it (hairstyle, make-up, new clothes, dental work, plastic surgery).

Somehow, we believe that an external or situational change will put and end to the old and begin a new, more pleasant situation.

We look for new opportunities to “start again” to “start over” to make a “fresh start” or a “clean break”.

The truth is, most situational and external changes do not change anything at all (not fundamentally).

I usually keep politics and social issues out of the pulpit (I just want to preach the Word book by book and address the issues that Scripture addresses).

But this morning (because of a major social issue that “came out” (pun intended) this week), I want to spend some time looking at the Bruce Jenner fiasco. While many people would disagree with my word choice, I believe that fiasco is appropriate in this situation. What Bruce Jenner (and those who are singing his praises) calls a victory and a success and an act of bravery and courage, I call a sad attempt to mask the true issues that have made Bruce so confused and miserable.

In case you are not aware of what took place this week, Bruce Jenner was revealed on the cover of Vanity Fair as Caitlyn Jenner — in Bruce’s mind (and in the minds of millions of his supporters), Bruce Jenner no longer exists; Bruce has transformed into Caitlyn. A man has ceased to exist and a woman has taken his place in this world.

The sexual / gender perversions and confusion in society are not going away anytime soon; they will almost certainly be an issue until Jesus returns (whenever that takes place).

The LGBT community is making progress in promoting its agenda and is becoming ever more aggressive in its attacks against anyone or any group who or which disagrees with their warped world views. The “transformation” of Bruce to Caitlyn is being praised as a breakthrough for the LGBT community.

Many supporters are thrilled that Bruce’s transformation was a “success” and that the initial response to his gender reassignment (as they call the process of mutilating one’s body from one gender to another through a series of drug treatments and surgical removal and construction of sexual organs) was widely embraced.

As soon as the Vanity Fair cover went viral, Bruce’s Twitter account took just four hours and three minutes to hit the 1,000,000 follower mark (as of Wednesday the follower count was 2.32 million).

It is clear that many people in our world are in support of this situation; which is a sad and eyeopening commentary on society’s opposition to God and His Word.

Often, as Christians, we think “That’s horrible, but it really has no impact on my life.” That simply is not true. All areas of our society will be impacted by this event and others like it that will certainly follow.

It is not just LGBT supporters who are and will be impacted by this situation. The fallout from this situation will permeate all areas of society and culture. This type of perversion and distortion of mankind’s natural and God-determined sexual identity (male or female) will be taught to school children (at all grade levels) as the new norm. Children who are still learning how to read and spell and write will be told that they are whatever they feel and think they are (because after all, in the fallen minds of Jenner’s supporters, it is your feelings that determine the reality of your identity and existence not your physiological, biological, and genetic make up). I am afraid that in the not so distant future, whether or not a baby is born with male or female anatomy, the proud parents really won’t be able to declare that their new bundle of joy is male or female. What parents will have to do is wait until that child grows up and is able to verbally and physically determine which gender it (it will come to the point where we cannot even refer to a baby / young child as he or she until that child reveals their preferred gender) wants to pursue. Human sexuality will cease to be determined by one’s genetic make-up and will be replaced with a subjective perception of sexual identity.

The extreme and logical conclusion of this type of thinking will result in a society where there are no objective norms or boundaries. It will be a society where everyone does what is right in its own eyes. When natural, God-determined physical / sexual identities and roles are erased from society’s vocabulary, there will be no way of enforcing laws or standards as we know them today. Homosexuality, lesbianism, pedophelia, beastiality, marriages between multiple spouses, and many more perversions will simply be the new norm. If we as a people continue down this path, we will undoubtedly become the new Sodom and Gomorrah.

I wish that I could say that this support and praise for Bruce’s transformation (and the homosexual agenda in general) was limited to the secular and non-Christian world. Unfortunately it is not.

Episcopal Church…

This excerpt from the Episcopal Church’s Webpage describes its position on the issue…

In 1976, the General Convention of the Episcopal Church declared that “homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church” (1976-A069). Since then, faithful Episcopalians have been working toward a greater understanding and radical inclusion of all of God’s children.

Along the way, The Episcopal Church has garnered a lot of attention, but with the help of organizations such as Integrity USA, the church has continued its work toward full inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Episcopalians. In 2003, the first openly gay bishop was consecrated; in 2009, General Convention resolved that God’s call is open to all; and in 2012, a provisional rite of blessing for same-gender relationships was authorized, and discrimination against transgender persons in the ordination process was officially prohibited. To our lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender brothers and sisters: “The Episcopal Church welcomes you!”


Presbyterian Church USA…

Likewise, in March 2015, the PCUSA modified it’s statement on marriage.

“Marriage is a gift God has given to all humankind for the wellbeing of the entire human family. Marriage involves a unique commitment between two people, traditionally a man and a woman, to love and support each other for the rest of their lives. The sacrificial love that unites the couple sustains them as faithful and responsible members of the church and the wider community.”


The change is subtle but it kicks the door wide open for any and all non-traditional marriages to be accepted and encouraged by the PCUSA.

Every day, more and more professing Christians are abandoning God’s Word and embracing man’s so called wisdom and progressive thinking.

Any and all lines that used to demonstrate a distinct difference in worldview and practices between Christianity and the rest of the world, are being systematically erased. At this rate, there will be more tares filing places of worship than will be wheat.

This is why I have chosen to address this issue today. My goals in addressing this issue are to answer the following questions…

What was Bruce trying to accomplish through this transformation?

How has the secular world responded to Bruce’s transformation?

What does the Bible say about Bruce’s transformation?

How should you as a Christian Biblically respond to this transformation?

What was Bruce trying to accomplish through this transformation?

Bruce Jenner, in an extreme and saddening attempt, was and is trying to “change his spots”. In recent statements, Bruce (Caitlyn) said the following…

“I have high hopes that Caitlyn is a better person than Bruce. I am very much looking forward to that.”


“Bruce always had to tell a lie. He was always living a lie. Every day, he always had a secret. From morning till night. Caitlyn doesn’t have any secrets.”

“I’m so happy after such a long struggle to be living my true self. Welcome to the world Caitlyn. Can’t wait for you to get to know her/me.”

“[As] soon as the Vanity Fair cover comes out, I’m free.”


In Bruce’s mind, his goal in all of this is to…

1) Become a better person

2) Become a truthful person

3) Become a happy person

4) Become a free person

It is very clear, by Bruce’s own admission, that he was (and I believe is still) very miserable as the man Bruce Jenner. Bruce was so dissatisfied and fed-up with being his natural born self that he went to the greatest extreme he could imagine in an attempt not to simply change Bruce, but to exterminate Bruce altogether. The world believes that Bruce’s transformation was a success…but did he really succeed?

Just in case you are unaware or uncertain of just what took place during Bruce’s transformation, consider the following…

“Caitlyn Jenner did not want to look like a pretend woman when she transitioned from a man to a woman. Caitlyn told Vanity Fair it was extremely important that she presented herself as feminine.” – TMZ

Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2015/06/02/caitlyn-jenner-vanity-fair-video-look-like-man-indress/#ixzz3bwDRy8u2

“Jenner tells Bissinger about how she suffered a panic attack the day after undergoing 10-hour facial-feminization surgery on March 15—a procedure she believed would take 5 hours. (Bissinger reveals that Jenner has not had genital surgery.) She recalls thinking, ‘What did I just do? What did I just do to myself?’ A counselor from the Los Angeles Gender Center came to the house so Jenner could talk to a professional, and assured her that such reactions were often induced by pain medication, and that second-guessing was human and temporary.”


“It’s been a busy couple of months for Caitlyn Jenner. Vanity Fair was by her side as she underwent her initial facial feminization and breast implant surgery in March, but RadarOnline.com has learned that there’s still one procedure she didn’t want to discuss until her docuseries: According to an insider, Caitlyn scheduled her gender reassignment surgery for after completing the Vanity Fair feature story documenting her transition to becoming a woman. According to the Vanity Fair blockbuster feature with a stunning Caitlyn on the cover, the journalist completed the bulk of their interview in March and April. The article states that she had not yet had a full sex change at that time.”


So what actually happened to Bruce during the procedure?

1) Feminization of his facial features (a 10 hour process)

2) Panic attack (as he realized the magnitude of his extreme actions)

3) Breast implants

4) A sex change (the mutilation of his male organ to “create” a female organ)

What has happened to Bruce Jenner? Simply put, a false front has been built in order the hide the true and unchangeable interior design; HE IS STILL A MAN. As TMZ reported, Bruce (Caitlyn) did not want to look like a “pretend woman”. No matter how many procedures Bruce has and no matter how many drugs Bruce takes and no matter how many dresses Bruce wears and no matter how much make up Bruce applies, HE IS A PRETEND WOMAN.

For all of Bruce’s time, money, and discomfort…he has accomplished absolutely nothing. He has not achieved his goals.

How has the secular world responded to Bruce’s transformation?

It is clearly obvious that many millions of people all over the world support, embrace, and stand with Bruce’s decision to become Caitlyn. Here are just a few quotes from some of his most famous supporters.

Laverne Cox (Transgender / Orange is the New Black)

Laverne Cox (who was born and still is a man, was the first Transgender person on the cover of Time magazine, is a star in the hugely popular Netflix show Orange is the New Black, and until Jenner’s Vanity Fair cover, was the “poster child” for the Transgender community) had this to say about Jenner’s transformation…

“I am so moved by all the love and support Caitlyn is receiving. It feels like a new day, indeed, when a trans person can present her authentic self to the world for the first time and be celebrated for it so universally.”

“Yes, Caitlyn looks amazing and is beautiful but what I think is most beautiful about her is her heart and soul, the ways she has allowed the world into her vulnerabilities,”

“I hope, as I know Caitlyn [Jenner] does, that the love she is receiving can translate into changing hearts and minds about who all trans people are as well as shifting public policies to fully support the lives and well being of all of us.”

Laverne Cox – https://www.facebook.com/topic/Laverne-Cox/226167757491563? source=wtfrt&position=7&trqid=6155871773453517806

On a recent Good Morning America piece, Jenner’s step-daughters had this to say about their newly transformed parental figure…

Kim Kardashian – “How beautiful, how proud, live life your way.”

Kendall Kardashian – “Be free now pretty bird.”

It has also been announced (the day after the Vanity Fair cover was revealed) that during the next month’s annual ESPYS (ESPN Annual Award Show) Jenner will receive the Arthur Ashe Courage Award.

So according to the secular world, Bruce is / will or has accomplish(ed)…

1) Authentic (Cox)

2) Amazing, beautiful (physically and heart and soul) (Cox)

3) Change hearts, minds, and shift public policies (Cox)

4) Living (his) way (Kim K)

5) Free (Kendall K)

6) Courageous (ESPN)

Despite all the support that is pouring in throughout the world, there are many who disagree with the process and success of Jenner’s transformation. Here is one such person who represents many in the medical world.

In a 2014 Wall Street Journal article, Dr. Paul McHugh (former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital) had this to say about the transgender issue (though not directly addressing Jenner’s transformation, the transgender issue and procedure is the same)…

“At the heart of the problem is confusion over the nature of the transgendered. ‘Sex change’ is biologically impossible. People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women. Claiming that this is civil-rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder.

We at Johns Hopkins University—which in the 1960s was the first American medical center to venture into ‘sex-reassignment surgery’—launched a study in the 1970s comparing the outcomes of transgendered people who had the surgery with the outcomes of those who did not. Most of the surgically treated patients described themselves as ‘satisfied’ by the results, but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery. And so at Hopkins we stopped doing sex-reassignment surgery, since producing a ‘satisfied’ but still troubled patient seemed an inadequate reason for surgically amputating normal organs.

It now appears that our long-ago decision was a wise one. A 2011 study at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden produced the most illuminating results yet regarding the transgendered, evidence that should give advocates pause. The long-term study—up to 30 years—followed 324 people who had sex-reassignment surgery. The study revealed that beginning about 10 years after having the surgery, the transgendered began to experience increasing mental difficulties. Most shockingly, their suicide mortality rose almost 20-fold above the comparable nontransgender population. This disturbing result has as yet no explanation but probably reflects the growing sense of isolation reported by the aging transgendered after surgery. The high suicide rate certainly challenges the surgery prescription.”

Dr. Paul McHugh – http://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-mchugh-transgender-surgery-isnt-thesolution-1402615120 (June 12, 2014)

Despite all the supporters that Bruce has in his corner, medically, physically, biologically, genetically, Bruce has failed in his attempts at creating a new person. And make no mistake, that is what Bruce and many others like him have tried, are trying, and desire to do. The idea that one’s mental perception of oneself (along with pharmaceutical and surgical procedures) can reverse or evolve one’s physical identity is simply impossible. What makes matters worse is the fact that many who undergo this procedure are no better off mentally than before the radical mutilation process. So if gender reassignment is not the answer, what is?

What Does the Bible Say About Bruce’s Transformation?

So does the Bible specifically address the transgender issue? If you are looking for a specific mention of the word “Transgender” in Scripture, you will never find it. The reason being, the term transgender did not exist and the transgender process was not possible when Scripture was written. However, this does not mean that the Bible does not address the fundamental issues at the core of human sexuality and gender.

Whether you choose to use the term transgender, Gender Identity Disorder (GID), or gender dysphoria (which is the choice of the DSM V), what is being described is a desire to change one’s sex (physical traits through hormone therapy and / or surgical procedures) or to fulfill the role of the opposite gender. Transgenders usually describe themselves as “trapped” in a body that does not match their gender. As we have already seen, the desire is that the transgender person will become the person they believe is their true identity but which has been trapped inside the physical prison of their assigned gender at birth.

Contrary to secular opinion, the Bible has quite a bit to say about human sexuality. From the earliest pages of Scripture, God makes it very clear that He created mankind “male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27). And and all variations / deviations from God’s intended plan for His creation are unbiblical.

One of the key issues that transgenders bring up when asked about their decision to become another gender is one of dissatisfaction with what they call their assigned birth gender (being born male or female). Transgenders believe that because they mentally and emotionally desire to be the opposite gender, their birth identity (male or female) is a mistake that needs correction. However, in Psalm 139, we are told that God specifically fashions each and every individual, “For You formed my inward parts;You wove me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth…” (139:13-16).

The Bible makes it clear that God does not make mistakes. God never has a “Plan B”, there are no contingencies with God, He never second guesses what He has done and because He is omniscient, He knows all things past, present, and future (including our maleness or femaleness at birth and throughout our lives). His wonderful work leaves no room for mistakes; therefore, no one is born with the “wrong body.”

The Bible also has much to say concerning the sinfulness of distorting God’s created order. Once sin entered the Garden of Eden and man was cast out, the depravity began to grow at a rapid pace. Consider the following statements that Scripture makes about sexual sins…

Genesis 19:1-7 – “Now the two angels came to Sodom in the evening as Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. And he said, ‘Now behold, my lords, please turn aside into your servant’s house, and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you may rise early and go on your way.’ They said however, ‘No, but we shall spend the night in the square.’ Yet he urged them strongly, so they turned aside to him and entered his house; and he prepared a feast for them, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.’ But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, ‘Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly…’”

Deuteronomy 22:5 – “A woman shall not wear man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.”

Jude 7 – “Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire.”

Romans 1:18-32 (26-27 cited) – “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 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.”

I could go on and on citing passages that explain and condemn various sexual sins but the point is this, no matter if the gender distortion has a genetic, hormonal, physiological, or psychological cause, the Bible clearly and consistently labels any sexual activity outside of marriage or not between a man and a woman as sin and as rebellion against God’s ordained plan. The punishment of such sins being not only physical death (which all sinners suffer, heterosexual or homosexual, or other-sexual, for “the wages of sin is death” – Romans 6:23a) but spiritual death.

The things that Bruce Jenner and others like him are seeking will never be found by mutilating their bodies and parading around as the opposite sex. Their desires can only be satisfied when an internal change takes place because…a leopard cannot change his spots.

No matter how hard and passionately a sinner tries to better himself, he simply cannot change his nature (sin nature that is). No matter how many people approve of others’ perversions and call them natural, authentic, heroic, or any other positive and encouraging terms, God still calls their actions sin and sin must be punished by God or He will cease to be God (because a judge who does not punish a criminal is not just but corrupt).

However, with all this bad news comes some good news, sin can be forgiven and lives can be changed through faith in Christ. Earlier we looked at Jeremiah 13:23 which says… “Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then you also can do good who are accustomed to doing evil.” The understanding here is that man cannot change his sinful nature; man is unable to change himself from the inside. All of man’s external attempts to transform himself are merely external and ultimately futile.

All the desires of man (acceptance, love, freedom, purpose, etc.), are satisfied only in Jesus Christ. When a sinner repents and embraces the good news of Jesus Christ, an internal transformation takes place. The believers in Corinth are an example of such a change: “And [effeminate, homosexual, etc.] is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Corinthians 6:11). There is hope for every sinner, homosexual, transgenders, and all sinners included, because of God’s forgiveness available exclusively through Jesus Christ.

How should you as a Christian biblically respond to this transformation?

1) Pray that people will accept the transforming gospel

Luke 13:34 – “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it!”

Romans 10:1 – “Brethren, my heart’s desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation.”

2) Remember that you were transformed by the gospel

Ephesians 2:1-5 – “And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 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. 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. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved).”

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 – “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.”

3) Live a life that is an example that you were transformed by the gospel

Ephesians 4:1 – “Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called…”

Matthew 5:16 – “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.”

4) Share about the transforming power of the gospel

1 Peter 3:15 – “…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…”

Romans 1:16 – “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.”

We as Christians must never compromise the divine truths of God’s Word. We must always call sin sin. But we must do so with compassion and passion. Compassion for the lost and passion for the souls of men to be truly transformed by the saving gospel of Jesus Christ.

Read Full Post »


LGBT Movement: Part 2

Alright all, here is another segment concerning the LGBT objections.  It is our prayer that the Lord will use this material to edify the body of Christ concerning the attacks against God’s Word concerning the Gospel.

LGBT Objection: Jesus never spoke out against Homosexuality.


  • To answer this question, we need to understand the doctrine of the Trinity.  Jesus who is the second person of the Trinity, was behind the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 18-19) and the very person behind the prohibition against Homosexuals (Lev. 18:22; 20:13).  To deny that reality is to deny the eternality of Christ.  He was at creation. In fact, the world would not be a present reality if it was not for Christ (Col. 1:17).  Apostle John referred to His eternality in John 1:1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”  He is described as the Word being with the Father not only at creation, but before creation.  If that is not enough, Jesus Himself mentioned his eternality in John 8:58 when confronted by the Jews.  “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.'”  He was alive before Abraham was born.   In principle, we clearly know that Jesus was present at the condemnation of Sodom and Gomorrah and was the authoritative base that provided the prohibitions against homsexuality in Leviticus 18:22; 20:13.
  • It’s true that there are no statements in the NT of Jesus specifically giving an isolated condemnation against homosexuality. However, this is where they err by misrepresenting Scripture.  They are guilty of begging the question. To deny that Jesus never gave prohibitions against homosexuality is to deny the indissolubility of their union.  They can never be divided.  The Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit never works against one another.  They are always in harmony no matter the topic.  An eternal God demands an eternal sovereign will.  The God-head is never one step behind one another.
  • Food for thought for LGBT proponents. Just because Jesus did not address isolated sins individually such as rape, incest, bestiality, etc., are we to say that He sanctioned them?  That is faulty hermeneutics.  There are many things Jesus did and said, but they were never recorded (John 21:25).
  • By the way, Jesus, the God-man, in His hypostatic union, mentioned many of those sins (not individually) in Matthew Matt. 15:15-20; Mark 7:21-23.  It is not presented in the liking of the LGBT proponents, but He did address homosexuality.  It is found in this key word: πορνεία (porneia).  The word has a broad range that covers every kind of immorality, including beastiality (immoral intercourse with a beast), immoral intercourse with a close relative, etc.   Imagine one was to debate over the statement: “Congratulations Warriors, you are 2015 NBA Champions.”  The conjecture from the critic would be that it is not in reference to every single player in the Warriors uniform.  That would be a far-fetched conclusion because in context in terms of how that congratulatory term is used, has been predominately implemented in reference to every single player in the team. Even though the congratulatory remark does not list the individual names, it does not mean it was not addressed to every player.  The same logic applies to the passages in Matthew 15:15-20 and Mark 7:21-23, whereby the word porneia is used.  Jesus was condemning all of the sexually deviate behaviors.  Beloved, Christ is eternal.  He is truth.  He is holy.  He will never contradict Himself.
  • If the argument upholds the notion that Jesus was not against homosexuality because there was no individually isolated prohibitions, then that same ill logic needs to apply to other sins that Jesus did not address individually: pederasty, bestiality, necromancy, etc.  You see, the attempt to excuse homosexuality is nothing short of revisionist history.  They fall into a slippery slop when they blaspheme the institute of marriage as defined by God.
  • Why did Jesus condemn homosexuality?  He repudiated it because it was an abominable act that went against Gen. 2:22-24.  The fact that God made them “male and female” which was anchored in the foundation of creation, predicated against polygamy and any other deviant sexual lifestyles.  Hence, there is no condoning of same-sex relationship nor any room for more than two persons.  To do so would violate the permanent bond of the one-flesh union.  Only a monogamous relationship between a man and a woman can achieve the permanent bond of the one-flesh union.  To open-up the doors for same-sex relationships would entail a hostile act against the Gospel.  In fact, the Gospel only became a reality because the woman would bear a seed–the seed who would be Christ (Gen. 3:15).  And Christ would be the example for His people of how a marriage between a man and woman looks (Eph. 5:22-33). No one in the face of the earth held onto the definition marriage to the highest esteem than Jesus Christ did.  Remember what He said to the religious leaders in Matthew 19?

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.” ~ NASB

Next will be part 4.

Read Full Post »

Francis-Schaeffer the man

Seems like there has been some new materials from Francis Schaeffer being uploaded on Youtube!

Francis Schaeffer has written a book called “A Christian Manifesto.”  Sadly I read it years ago and don’t remember much of it anymore.  Schaeffer has gone on a speaking tour under the same name and this particular talk was filmed at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church (Formerly where D. James Kennedy preached at) in 1982.


Thanks to Francis Schaeffer Studies for the head’s up!


Read Full Post »

question mark

Someone last week asked me a question concerning my thoughts on God killing babies in the Old Testament and God’s love.  Here’s my quick reply:

First off concerning taking of life I think we must remember the Creator/Creature distinction. Specifically the differences between God and us is His prerogative to give and take life, as it originates from Him and we are not “owe” life (“he gives and takes away,” as Job 1:21 attests). If he takes our life even now there is nothing we can have as a basis to say He is wrong. I think this is foundational to everything else that follows.

Secondly I do think there are two kinds of love that we need to make note of theologically; for lack of better term there is “Common Grace” in which God even love His enemies (Matthew 5:43-45) and our love for our enemies rest on the ramification of the truth that God loves even His enemies. Common Grace must be distinguished from Special Grace or love and the activity of His love that efficaciously lead to salvation. Equivocate the two (that is, not making a distinction between those two forms of love) will get us into all kinds of hermeneutical and theological problems.

Thirdly I think early death does not necessarily always means God does not love the person; even if they are Babies and the death was the result of God dealing with sins. I think of David’s son who died and yet 2 Samuel 12:23 seem to imply David will see Him after death.

Fourthly, Scripture also talks about our sinfulness well before birth and thus babies do have sinful tendencies though of course the capacity and level of sin differ in degrees from that of adults.

Fifthly, do you have book on Presuppositional apologetics in general and Reformed books on Theodicy in particular?  I think it might be a good place to begin concerning the problem of evil and from there I recommend Gordon Clark’s work and Jay Adams on the Problem of Evil as I think they are Biblically helpful.

Read Full Post »


Good Morning America on Yahoo has a story titled “Mary Kay Letourneau Fualaau, Vili Fualaau Detail Their Path From Teacher-Student Sex Scandal to Raising Teenagers.”  Its a story about a female teacher who got involved in a sexual relationship with her underage students and their interview 18 years after making national headlines.  With the rising tide of female teachers having inappropriate relationships with their students this is relevant and it is worth the time to look at the story and reflect upon it from a Christian perspective.

The article begins as such:

When Mary Kay Letourneau Fualaau was forced to go public in 1997 with an affair she was having with her former sixth grade student, Vili Fualaau, after she became pregnant with his child, it was the teacher-student sex scandal heard around the world.

At the time, Mary was a 34-year-old, married teacher in Seattle, who already had four children of her own. Vili was just 13 years old. Mary was arrested and served seven and a half years in prison.

Today, Mary is 53 and Vili is 31. The couple is still together and are about to celebrate their 10th wedding anniversary. The two daughters they have together are now teenagers — older than Vili was when the affair started.

Mary and Vili sat down for an exclusive interview with Barbara Walters to talk about how they managed to stay together all these years, despite their very public and forbidden relationship.

“If it wasn’t strong enough in the beginning, it wouldn’t have carried through those years,” Mary told Walters.

First off I’m going to say it straight up.  Mary was married when she began the relationship.  She broke her marriage, wronged her husband.  This is adultery and a sin before the Lord.

Secondly I suppose one’s immediate reaction would be “Wow, this relationship lasted so long!”  If we use the same train of thought as those who want to legitimize homosexual “marriages” and relationship because some homosexual couples have been together a long time no doubt the conclusion of such line of reasoning applied here is that there is nothing wrong with an adult pursuing romantic and sexual interests with minors.  Frightening.

Thirdly, from what we can gather from this Yahoo article, Mary is unrepentant.  This is collaborated by the account of her continuing the relationship despite court order, her willingness to divorce her husband and the persona that she is happy that she’s have him.  Note what she says when asked about her guilt:

When asked if she felt guilty or disgusted with herself for having the affair, Mary said, “I loved him very much, and I kind of thought, ‘why can’t it ever just be a kiss?'”

There is the danger of an ethic that believes that when something feels good it must be right.

Fourthly, I think reading the ending of the article is very illuminating.  Mary and Vili can be sexual libertines all they want and try to be self-righteous about it but having children changes things.  It reveals deep down they don’t really believe that their own lifestyle is right.  Pay attention to these words:

Audrey graduates from high school this coming June, and will attend community college in the fall. Georgia is a sophomore and a cheerleader. Both sing in their high school choir. Their parents are very protective, and Vili said he has warned his daughters against having boyfriends.

“The reason for me telling them that was just from, out of experience,” he said. “A relationship could lead to something that you think you wanted back then. You don’t really want it, maybe, years later.”

If either of their girls did what they did, if they came home one day and said they were sleeping with their teacher, both Mary and Vili said they would be shocked and upset.

“I don’t support younger kids being married or having a relationship with someone older,” Vili said. “I don’t support it.”

The whole thing is insightful.  Just so you don’t miss it I thought this part was the bombshell: “If either of their girls did what they did, if they came home one day and said they were sleeping with their teacher, both Mary and Vili said they would be shocked and upset.

Fifthly, you would think that the double standard and inconsistency of Mary and Vili is something important enough to be emphasized in the Yahoo article.  The title has no indication that it is on the editor’s radar.  Typically in journalism the important information is presented earlier in the article rather than later.  There are no hints throughout the article of Mary’s and Vili’s inconsistency that led to the ironic ending.  I think this is very telling of the lens that Good Morning America sees this story.  And how they see the news.  There is no neutrality–even in journalism.

I hope and pray the two would come to see their sins for what it is and repent unto the Lord Jesus Christ.

Read Full Post »

Abner Chou

Pay attention to the name Abner Chou as I believe he will be more well known in the larger Evangelical world of Scholarship in the next few years.

Abner Chou is Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies at The Master’s College and Seminary. From what I understand he turned down his college acceptance to Princeton or some other Ivy League School to attend the Master’s College.  After the Master’s College he went on to the Master’s Seminary where he completed M.Div., Th.M., and Th.D.  This year he was a speaker for the Truth and Life Conference and was a seminar speaker for the Inerrancy Summit.  He is currently working on an exegetical commentary on the book of Lamentation for Logos’ Evangelical Exegetical Commentary.

Dr. Chou recently spoke at the Seminary’s Chapel from Acts 17 on the subject of the need for Christian Intellectual Engagement.

I’ve halfway through the video.  What is your thoughts on the message?


Read Full Post »

question mark

I haven’t been able to blog as frequently or be online as much as I would like with our blog series on worldviews, movies and comics given how things are with ministry this past week.  A few days ago I wrote a post “Pursuing Worldview Apologetics and being Culturally Informed Without Compromise” (read that post before this one for context).  I enjoyed the edifying and challenging conversations with our friend Tiribulus on our comment section for this series and his comment for that particular post stood out so I will be sharing them here.

His comments touched on the issue of whether or not we should watch everything in order to engage with the world.  I think his comment is helpful in terms of what to do when a nonbeliever in an evangelistic dialogue reference ungodly movies that Christians shouldn’t watch, or even movies and other cultural references that a Christian might not know about.

My original comment that he is responding to:

SlimJim says: ” To love them also mean you want to know where they are coming from; it means listening to them. As you listen to them you will hear what “their own prophets” and poets might say.”

This is his comment:

THAT, is the key in practice. I don’t need to participate in their cultural idols. THEY can tell me about them. And they will.

If one had never seen even a single television show or movie in their entire lives, their witness is not hampered at all. In fact, I say, and so does 1st Corinthians 1, that It’s greatly enhanced.

Say somebody brings up some famous cultural figure assuming you’ll know what they’re talking about.
Them: – “well, you know like [the guy in the movie] was saying in the scene when they were in the strip club discussing business”

You – “I haven’t seen that one, sorry”

Them – “ok, then another illustration might be where [in the some tv show] the women is lamenting her past talking about all the pain she has suffered”

You – “I haven’t seen that either. Actually I don’t have a tv.”

Them – “you don’t have a tv” (watch the SHOCKED look on their face)

You – “no sir, I don’t.”

Them – “Why not” (shocked look turns to genuine curiosity)

You – “well, it got to the point where I couldn’t tell God how my walk and service to Him was being helped by having one. I rarely go to the movies either. Same reason.”

Them – (they usually won’t know what exactly to say to that)

You – “but that ok. You can tell me about it and how it speaks to you about life and why it discredits Christianity”

They will.

Not only do you NOT have to participate in their worldly carnal media culture to converse with them, but THEY themselves will tell you what it personally means to them. It’s all about THEM. Not YOU being a culture savvy hipster.


Read Full Post »

Older Posts »


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,494 other followers