Are All Sins Equal?

IMG_0022.PNG

Unless you’ve literally been living under a rock or don’t know what smartphones are, then maybe you’re unaware of this, but just about everyone else in America has been watching the media increasingly make light of sin in general… and much of what is seen in any negative light is relative. Innumerable people are idolaters, not to mention those who are sexually immoral, or who commit adultery (homosexuality is outright celebrated), or those who steal and are greedy and get wasted and revile neighbors and swindle others. It happens all the time. Seriously, every single day. And each of these unrepentant sins are the same in the sense of God’s judgment. They all deserve His wrath. And yet, we’re constantly reminded that “such were some of you” (1st Corinthians 6:11; Ephesians 2:1-5).

During the Reformation there was a common saying, Semper Reformanda. It was an important slogan at the time, but today it is unfortunately overlooked. In Latin, it simply means “always reforming.” The Reformers may have gotten a lot right about the Bible, but they didn’t go far enough in their theology. (And they knew that.) As Protestants today, we must always go back to the Bible to see where we have wandered from the truth. We often believe something is biblical just because it feels spiritual, because it feels right, we’ve heard other Christians say it, or a major denominational leader believes it to be true. However, we must go back to the Text every time. Our hearts are prone to deceive us (Jeremiah 17:9).

Referring back to the Text corrects the idea that “God helps those who help themselves” (Benjamin Franklin said this, not God). It equips us to discern whether cleanliness is, in fact, next to godliness (I have no idea where that goofy saying comes from, but people say it). And I believe it can help with another common statement I repeatedly hear Christians say: “All sins are equal.”

When confronted about their sin, it’s sadly not too uncommon for some adulterous husband/wife to respond, “All sins are equal, so who are you to rebuke me?! Your problem with pride is as bad as my infidelity.”

I’ve heard people say that greed is as bad as abortion, selfishness is as bad as divorce, and slander is just as bad as murder… But are these claims in line with what the Bible actually says?

All Sins Are NOT Equal

The Bible is clear that all sins are not equal:

In John 19:11, Jesus says to Pilate, “… he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin.” Jesus is saying that some sins are considered greater.

In Ezekiel 8:6, Ezekiel is told “… But you will see still greater abominations.” This passage declares that some abominations or sinful actions are greater than others.

In Matthew 5:19, Jesus rebukes anyone who “… relaxes one of the least of these commandments…” This verse reveals that some commands are lesser while others are weightier (Matthew 23:23).

In Numbers 15, the Bible contrasts sin done unintentionally and sin done “with a high hand,” meaning sin done willingly while shaking one’s fist at God. Intentional sin is treated as far more offensive than unintentional sin.

Unrepentant sins are worse than repentant sins. For example, someone who struggles with same-sex attraction but fights it because they love Christ more, is very different than someone who gives themselves over to their sin because they love the sin more than they love Christ (1st John 1:8-10).

Clearly, some sins are more offensive to God than others. Some sins are more “high-handed.” Some sins come from a much darker heart than others. Some sins will carry heavier consequences in this life, hurt in a more far-reaching manner, while some sins will hinder your relationship with God more than others.

… But All Sins ARE Equal

But there is good news. When someone says all sins are equal, they are not entirely off base. All sins are equal in the sense that all sins are offensive to God. All sins are equal in that God demands perfection, and any sin makes you imperfect, thus, making you in need of a perfect Savior. The best news is that all sins are equal in that Jesus’ blood is enough to cover all of them. Whether it is abortion, lying, stealing, rape, cursing, adultery, pride, murder, pornography, or gluttony, Christ’s blood is stronger than both the weakest and strongest of sins.

So, How Should We Live?

This idea offers a warning for those who are tempted to wander into darker and darker sins. Stay in the light. Stay away from things that will hurt you. Don’t allow the phrase “all sins are equal” to blind you from the damaging and damning effects of sin. Don’t fall for the trap that suggests you may as well sleep with the coworker you are flirting with since you have already committed adultery in your heart. That is madness! Don’t buy into the lie that you might as well have premarital sex since you are addicted to porn, anyway. Lesser sins have a way of begetting greater ones.

Conversely, don’t be crushed by the lie that your sin is too great for the grace of God to cover. Don’t buy into the lie that you’re ever too far gone, or that God’s love cannot afford you strength to overcome any snare. All sins may be unequal in the degree to which they offend God and harm others, but all sins are equal in their ability to be forgiven. We are not Christians with an asterisk. We are beloved children of God by adoption, and in Christ, He sees us as perfect.

Advertisements

Two Men Went to the Temple (Luke 18:9-14)

20140112-112906.jpg

I was recently given the privilege to preach at our home church, Vintage Church in Allen, TX.

Sermon audio link.

Sermon notes (rough draft of transcript):

Two Men Went to the Temple (Luke 18:9-14)

Opening Question:

What if our sin problem isn’t that we’re wicked? What if it’s that we’re good?

Scripture passage:

“He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.” – Luke 18:9-14 (ESV)

Opening quotes:

“The greatest threat to the church isn’t atheism or materialism, but moralism that celebrates a righteousness which doesn’t come from Christ.” – Paul David Tripp

“Satan’s masterpiece is the Pharisee, not the prostitute.” – Tullian Tchividjian

Characters:

1. The Pharisee (like the elder brother in Luke 15)

This guy was varsity. He followed the law in a way that would embarrass the rest of us. If morality was a sport (and to some people it is), this guy wouldn’t have enough fingers for his championship rings. [Go over his listed credentials.]

Kind if like when I’m building a résumé for applying for a job, or an application to get into a certain school, I have found myself at times building some kind of a spiritual résumé, almost like a checklist, or some list of qualifications that could somehow prove to myself cognitively that I’m worthy of God’s love and affection. Am I alone in this? Am I the only one who has ever sat there and compared myself to my neighbor, a co-worker, another person who performed worse than you in a similar situation? Have you ever had the thought, however fleeting, at least I’m not a hardened criminal, I’ve never stolen that much money, never killed a guy, it’s not like I’m Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Jeffry Dahmer, or Charles Manson… I’ve just made a few mistakes in life, but for the most part, I’m a pretty good guy. You will always be able to find someone worse than you; at least you should be able to do that. Anyone else feeling strangely able to relate to the Pharisee here?

[Our neighbors and their pet’s story… Costco customers and their shopping carts story…]

2. The Tax Collector (like the younger brother in Luke 15)

There is no cultural equivalent to a tax collector in first century Rome. A tax collector was a wicked, sinful, piece of trash who was more than deserving of being burned alive. They purchased the right from Rome to collect money (up to 90% of annual income) from their own people. It’s worse than them just taking an extra $20 from everyone. They purchased the right to collect taxes for Rome… for the empire that ruled and reigned over most of the known world at the time… how did they do that? With a standing army… they have jets, hummers, missiles, or satellites… So they needed a lot of tax money to afford that military. Tax collectors were the mediators helping to fund a massive army that was responsible for the rape, murder, torture, and crucifixion of hundreds of thousands of men, women, and even children; many of whom were the same race, ethnicity, and people group as the tax collector taking money… in this case, the Jews. To the Jews, tax collectors were men raising money to support the atrocities taking place against them and their family. Zacchaeus was not simply a cute wee little man, he had done disgustingly vile things. Would it not raise some eyebrows if our pastor went over to a guy’s house for dinner who was known for financially supporting sex-trafficking, drug cartels, and the brutal murder of innocent women and children?

Yet, Jesus tells us the tax collector went home justified… but not the Pharisee… this would have been very shocking to the original listeners.

What was the Pharisee not seeing?

The Pharisee (and a few verses later the rich young ruler, also) fails to understand what many of us fail to understand: that Christianity is not a religion. He thanks God for his exceptional morality and righteousness, but misses the fact that his “goodness” is still woefully short of the bar (Isaiah & Philippians: bloody rags and poop). The mantra of religion is, “I obey, therefore I am worthy and accepted.” The Scriptures, however, teach vehemently against this idea constantly.

The message we usually hear from the pulpit at church is “repent of your wickedness.” Stop sleeping around. Stop doing drugs. Stop getting drunk. Stop watching rated R movies that aren’t about the crucifixion of Christ. Stop partying. Stop cussing. Stop skipping church, because if the door is open, you should be there. I would agree that many of these things are sinful and need to be repented of, but that’s not the message of Luke 18. Instead of calling out the overtly wicked, Jesus says this: “You good husbands, you good fathers, good wives, good mothers, good students, you small-group-leading, church-going, tithing, morally righteous men and women… you need to repent.”

When we grasp that we are unworthy sinners saved by an infinitely costly grace, it destroys both our self-righteousness and our need to ridicule others (the Pharisee thanked God he wasn’t like other men, like the tax collector). Trying to somehow earn your salvation through good works is just as God-belittling, Scripturally ignorant, cross-mocking wickedness as anything on the secular pagan, dark side of the fence. We tell ourselves, “I’m a better man than my father was… my neighbor George is a horrible dude, I’m not like him… I’m a good husband… I’m a good dad… I’m a good wife… I’m a good mother… I’m a good student… I’m a hard worker… I’m involved in the church.” Jesus says, “Repent! That does not save you. None of your works save you! That does not justify you.” When we understand this rightly, we don’t stand next to the cross and tell everyone else to repent, we lay down on our face and tell others there is room.

Looking at the passage in the context of the continuation of the text:

Luke 18:15-17… We must enter the Kingdom of God like a child.

“What did you have to do with being born? Did you work hard to earn the privilege of being born? Did it happen due to your hard work and skillful planning? Not at all. You don’t earn or contribute anything to being born. It is a free gift of life. And so it is with the new birth. Salvation by grace – there are no moral efforts that can earn or merit it. You must be born again.” – Tim Keller

Luke 18:18-30… The story of the Rich Young Ruler. One thing you still lack. PERIOD. PAUSE. He lacks something; he lacks Christ’s imparted righteousness. Jesus exposes his heart by asking him to give up his excessive wealth.* The young man is asking for insight on behavioral modification, not grace.

*Cross reference this story with Luke 12:32-34. Very important passage in understanding that Jesus wasn’t simply giving another rule to, but was exposing a heart issue in the rich young ruler. “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

Continuation Question(s):

So what does this old story from a couple thousand years ago about these two very different men have to do with us today?

Secularism and religion are both all about your personal performance. The Gospel is the performance of Another applied to you. I believe that the bulk of our weird American evangelicalism is built on this idea that “my behavior makes God owe me, and that what saves me is my good works.”

The basic premise of “religion,” that if you live a good life, things will go well for you – is wrong. Jesus was the most morally upright person who ever lived, yet He had a life filled with the experience of poverty, rejection, injustice, and even torture. Jesus says in the gospel that everyone is wrong, everyone is loved, and everyone is called to recognize this and change. The essence of other religions is advice about how to live. The essence of Christianity is news – here is what has been done.

That whole illustration, those analogies with scales when it comes to being good or bad, they all need to be tossed out and forgotten. There are no scales!!! You’re either fully justified and redeemed by the blood of Christ on the Cross and His resurrection, or you’re not justified at all.

There are two ways of being lost, two ways of trying to save/justify yourself, two ways of trying to avoid God or somehow put Him in your debt. One is to keep all the rules, and the other is to break all the rules (like the two sons/brothers in the Luke 15 parable).

Before we continue, please nobody try to take this where it’s not going. Discipline is not legalism. I still love, pursue, and date my wife. I still work on loving her better and growing deeper in relationship with her, I’ll admit I fail at doing that as well as I should, but none of that is to get her to marry me… we’re already married.

Closing remarks:

Don’t get me wrong, I am in no way saying the law is of no value. Any theology that denies God’s moral law, and then domesticates sin by its absence, does not have Christ’s atoning love, God’s justifying pardon, or the Holy Spirit’s kind company. But the law cannot save.

Do you possess a desire for, strong affection for, and an exaltation of the person and work of Jesus Christ in the cross and in His resurrection? Or do you hang all of your hope in your righteousness on managing your own morality and church participation?

If your hope, confidence, and satisfactions are in being a good husband, being a good wife, being a good father, being a good mother, being a good churchman, a good kid, a good student, a good worker, a good citizen, just a good person at all… you’ve severely misplaced your hope in something that cannot and will not save you. No matter how law abiding or well behaved you are, we all end up 6 feet deep in the ground (or cremated if that’s more your style).

Repentance means coming back to the cross and confessing your infinite short-comings. We repent that we’ve become satisfied with just trying to better serve God rather than actually knowing or enjoying Him. We need to ask God once again for mercy, for His grace.

So, do you need to repent of goodness? I know I do. Do you need to ask forgiveness for your illusion of righteousness? I know I do. Constantly, I find myself trying to justify myself. We must throw ourselves on the mercy of God. Put our confidence in His cross, not in the fact that we’re “better” than our neighbor, or even that we’re better this year than we were last.

The Bible says it very clearly that if we could earn the favor of God with our behavioral modifications, then the cross of Christ was for nothing. In Galatians 2:21, Paul tells us: “I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.”

So is your confidence in your goodness? Repent. We have no confidence outside the goodness of Christ. Your goodness is a myth. Repent of worshiping your own righteousness and set your mind on the things of the Spirit – set your mind on Jesus Christ, the Author and Perfecter of our faith (Hebrews 12:2). Whatever you accomplish today and tomorrow, you are no more justified than you are right now in the already finished work of Jesus Christ. Work from your rest and rest in His already finished work.

Compassion

20130807-172954.jpg

Henri Nouwen explained it well that “Compassion is not a bending toward the underprivileged from a privileged position; it is not reaching out from on high to those who are less fortunate below; it is not a gesture of sympathy or pity for those who fail to make it in the upward pull. On the contrary, compassion means going directly to those people and places where suffering is most acute and building a home there.”

Our God has displayed ultimate compassion in His Son, Jesus Christ. By putting on flesh, stepping down into darkness, walking this earth, feeling pain, temptation, loss, weakness, abandonment, betrayal, hatred from others, unjust persecution, and wrongful sentencing from the government… witnessing the death of friends, and even experiencing death Himself on the cross and disconnection with the Father, the triune God has shown us He is not immune to pain. Rather, God takes our misery and suffering so seriously that He was willing to take it upon Himself. In Jesus Christ’s birth, life, and death He suffered in love, identifying with the abandoned, persecuted, and godforsaken. The Danish philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard, eloquently observed, “For love is exultant when it unites equals, but it is triumphant when it makes that which was unequal equal in love.” Might we be moved by His grace and reflect this great love to the world instead of trying to merely subdue it with suffocating law. Because everything that isn’t gospel, is law.

“I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in me that does not bear fruit He takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit. Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me. I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit and so prove to be my disciples. As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in His love. These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full. “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you. No longer do I call you servants, for the servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you. You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, He may give it to you. These things I command you, so that you will love one another.” – John 15:1-17 (ESV)

“For it was fitting that He, for whom and by Whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the Founder of their salvation perfect through suffering. For He who sanctifies and those who are sanctified all have one source. That is why He is not ashamed to call them brothers, saying, “I will tell of your name to my brothers; in the midst of the congregation I will sing your praise.” And again, “I will put my trust in Him.” And again, “Behold, I and the children God has given me.” Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death He might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. For surely it is not angels that he helps, but He helps the offspring of Abraham. Therefore He had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For because He Himself has suffered when tempted, He is able to help those who are being tempted.” – Hebrews 2:10-18 (ESV)

Life, and the sanctity thereof.

20130715-093317.jpg

There is a lot of talk these days about the horrors of abortion, as there very well should be. But Christians should also be proclaiming the forgiveness that is available in Jesus Christ for women who have had abortions, for the doctors who have performed abortions, for men who have encouraged abortions, for government officials who have legislated easier means for abortions, and anyone who has ever been involved with the action of an abortion. Because the bad news is, abortion is murder. The good news is, Jesus Christ died for murderers.

I of course cannot speak for everyone who claims to hold a “pro-life” point of view, but for me personally, I’ve yet to meet the person face-to-face who calls themselves “pro-life” and honestly advocates that any form of abortion, in any possible given situation, under any conceivable circumstance, for any possible reason is absolutely wrong, a “one-way ticket to hell,” and should never be allowed in any case whatsoever even to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape and incest. (It should be noted however, that since Roe v. Wade, the number of legal abortions done for those reasons amount for less than 2 percent of the 55-million-plus abortions performed in the United States since 1973.) The overwhelming majority of people I know, and the things I have read that take a “pro-life” stance, are against elective abortions being performed outside those perimeters, especially those that are merely due to inconvenience, financial issues, because of the gender of the baby, or high percentage probability that the child might have cognitive disabilities… those type of abortions are the clear cases I find it nearly impossible for anyone to justify morally.

Some reasons I’ve seen given for abortion outside of rape, incest, and severe endangerment to the mother’s health, are the issues or problems with the current adoption and foster care climate in the United States. I don’t know if those making that argument would go so far as to say it’s better to just kill a child in the womb than allow them the chance of a life outside it because it’s just statistically more likely that their life will be spent in poverty and strife, but that seems to be the logical conclusion of some advocates for this situation. I’ll admit that I am by nature a skeptical pessimist, but I have not been able to bring myself to such a logical conclusion as that. I find it difficult to justify choosing who gets a chance at life and who doesn’t. I don’t understand how the adoption and foster care systems of our country not being as effective as they should be, supports the case for women to electively abort babies anytime they please or see fit to do so (because it’s their body and nobody has a right to think any form of ethics should be a factor). Blaming such problems on a particular political party, however misguided and corrupt said party (let’s face it, all parties to varying extents) might be, doesn’t negate the ethical and moral implications of the fundamental issue at hand.

The battle over human dignity is waged not just at the local abortion clinic or crisis pregnancy center, nor merely in the halls of Congress or the Supreme Court. It is also carried out in our choice of words. And this is where the fundamental issue resides: what is life, what is human, when do ‘rights’ begin?

“Open your mouth for the mute, for the rights of all who are destitute. Open your mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy.” – Proverbs 31:8-9 (ESV)

The ‘pro-choice’ stance on the sanctity of human life relies on bullets of deception and warheads of untruth – in short, on what George Orwell called “political language,” which he said “is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

Those who support the legal killing of unborn human beings in the womb have used political language for decades, cloaking their morally indefensible position in innocuous-sounding terms such as “choice” and “women’s health” – hoping the rest of us will forget about the status and rights of the other person directly affected in the abortion transaction – namely the fetus.

Philosopher Peter Kreeft says that the “personhood of the fetus is clearly the crucial issue for abortion, for if the fetus is not a person, abortion is not the deliberate killing of an innocent person.” Kreeft adds, “Persons have a ‘right to life’ but non-persons (e.g., cells, tissues, organs, and animals) do not.”

Many people, when hearing about abortion, have maybe conjured up in their minds some not-so-invasive, painless “medical process.” That’s not what abortion is… Abortion is the dismembering of one human body in order to be able to more easily extract it from another human body. We read in disbelief about ancient pagan’s throwing their babies into fires in sacrifice to their “gods” – yet we harden our hearts to the reality of children this very hour being dismembered in worship of the god called “women’s rights.”

So it seems to be clear that the real fundamental issue in which many in our society differ on, is what is a human being (and when does life and basic human rights for that life begin)… I would dare to say that as a man, I have equal right to define human life as a woman (contrary to what some people have told me); since men and women are both humans and both are needed to procreate (outside of the use of a test tube, but that is silly and a bit pedantic to try to cloud the core issue with extreme cases). I believe that as a man, I have every right to help conceive a child, love a child, emotionally nurture a child, care for a child, provide monetarily for a child, protect a child, and fight for both the life of my wife (the mother of my child) and my child (whether biologically related or adopted).

It is well accepted in our society and culture (and yes, pretty much universally) that murder is wrong, whether from a legal, moral, or ethical basis. The issue therefore of abortion ultimately boils down to whether or not the one being aborted is a living human child. If so, he or she is to be protected by the same principles, and basic rights which guide our guarding of other human life. There are at least eleven important questions that I cannot quickly recall having heard “pro-choice political candidates” being frequently asked by the media:

1. You say you support a woman’s right to make her own reproductive choices in regards to abortion and contraceptions. Are there any restrictions at all, under any circumstances, or any particular situation that you would approve of?

2. In 2010, The Economist featured a cover story on “the war on girls” and the growth of “gendercide” in the world – abortion based solely on the sex of the baby. Does this phenomenon pose a problem for you or do you believe in the absolute right of a woman to terminate any pregnancy because the unborn fetus is a female (or any gender)? If you don’t agree a woman should be able to abort a child because of the gender of the baby, why not?

3. In many states, a teenager can have an abortion without her parents’ consent or knowledge but legally cannot get an aspirin from the school nurse without parental authorization. Do you support any restrictions or parental notification regarding abortion access for minors?

4. If you do not believe that human life begins at conception, when do you believe it does begin? At what stage of development should an unborn child have basic human rights? (What supports your view on this? Science, constitutional law, ethical principles, moral philosophy, faith, religion, worldview, personal experience?) (If an unborn baby isn’t really a human life yet, why do miscarriages seem to be so emotionally and psychologically difficult for mothers who experience such unfortunate events?)

5. Currently, when genetic testing reveals an unborn child has Down Syndrome (or other genetic “disadvantages” or “flaws”), many women choose to abort. How do you answer the charge that this phenomenon resembles the “eugenics” movement a century ago – the slow, but deliberate “weeding out” of those our society would deem “unfit” to live?

6. Do you believe an employer should be forced to violate his or her ethical, moral, or religious conscience by providing medical insurance to cover any and all abortion procedures (especially those of an elective nature) and provide easy access to abortifacient drugs to any and all employees?

7. Alveda King (niece of Martin Luther King, Jr.) has said that “abortion is the white supremacist’s best friend,” pointing to the fact that Black and Latinos represent 25% of our population but account for 59% of all abortions. How do you respond to this charge that the majority of abortion clinics are found in inner-city areas, servicing large numbers of minorities? Do you simply dismiss it as status quo, and give the excuse that “minorities” make up the majority of inner-city populations?

8. Many “pro-choice” advocates describe abortion as a “tragic choice.” If abortion is not truly morally or ethically objectionable at all, then why is it so tragic then? Does this mean there is something about abortion that is different than other standard surgical procedures?

9. Do you believe abortion should be legal once the unborn fetus is viable – able to survive outside the womb?

10. If a pregnant woman and her unborn child are murdered, do you believe the criminal should face two counts of murder and serve a harsher sentence? If so, why?

(Many supporters of no restriction, “pro-choice” under any circumstance make statements along the line that it is a woman’s body and men have no right to have a say, an input, or even an opinion. While I would agree that yes, the baby is very much conceived and living inside of the woman’s body, the baby is a separate entity. The baby is its own person, distinct from the mother… when would you say a child has basic human rights of its own? At what point does it become a human being with any rights?)

11. If a woman (mother) has the right to choose to abort her unborn child or carry the pregnancy to term and deliver the baby, and the man (father) has no say at all in the matter, should the man (father) still be equally legally and monetarily responsible for the child? That is to say, if a woman (mother) gets pregnant unexpectedly and she opted not to have an abortion, and the man (father) had already been very clear he did not want to have a child, the mother had previously agreed to abort the child, and the father had steadfastly made it clear that he did not want any part of the child’s life, then should it be legally possible for the single mother to request the court to mandate the father to pay child support? While I personally believe that the father is morally responsible for taking responsibility for the life he helped create, does this issue present a double standard in regards to abortion rights? If not, why?

Some more questions worth considering in regards to literally zero restrictions, legally eligible under any circumstance, elective abortions:

What should we legally, medically, realistically call the unborn in the womb?

If the entity in the womb is a living thing, is it not a life? If your person began as a single cell, how can that fertilized egg be something other than a human being? Isn’t it more accurate to say you were an embryo than that you simply came from one? So when exactly does a human being have a right to life?

Should we say it is size that matters in determining this distinction? Is the unborn child too small to deserve our protection? Are big people more valuable than little people? Are men more human than woman? Do big offensive linemen have more rights than little jockeys? Is the life in the womb of no account because we can’t hold him or her in our arms, or put him or her in our hands, or because we can only see them on a screen?

Should we make intellectual development and mental capacity the measure of our worth? Are three year-old children less valuable than thirteen year-olds? Is the unborn child less than fully human because he cannot speak or count or be self-aware? Does the cooing infant in the crib have to smile or shake your hand or recite the alphabet before she deserves another day? If an expression of basic mental acuity is necessary to be a full-fledged member of the human community, what shall we do with the comatose, the very old, those who have down syndrome, or the fifty year-old mom with Alzheimer’s? And what about all of us who sleep?

Shall we deny the unborn child’s right to life because of where he lives? Can environment give us value or take it away? Are we worth less inside than outside? Can we be justly killed when we swim under water? Does where we are determine who we are? Is it simply the eight inch journey down the birth canal that makes us human? Does this change of scenery turn “its” into persons? Is love and worth a condition of location?

Shall we reserve human dignity only for those humans who are not dependent on others? Do we deserve to live only when we can live on our own? Is the four-month old fetus in the womb less than human because she needs her mom for life? Is the four-month old infant less than human when she still needs her mom for life? What if you depend on dialysis or insulin or a breathing apparatus? Is value a product of fully-functioning vitality? Is independence a prerequisite for human identity? Are we worth only what we can think, accomplish, and do on our own?

If the unborn life is human life, what can justify snuffing it out? Would it be right to take the life of your child on his first birthday because he came to you through sad and tragic circumstances? Would you push an 18 month old into traffic because she makes our life difficult? Does a three year-old deserve to die because we think we deserve a choice, better opportunities, and less inconveniences?

What do you deserve now? What are your basic rights as a human person? Did you have those same rights five years ago? What about before you could drive? Or when you used training wheels? Were you less than fully human when you played in the sandbox? When you wore a bib? When you nursed at your mother’s breast? When your dad cut your cord? When you tumbled in that watery mess and kicked against that strange wall? When your heart pounded on the monitor for the first time? When you grew your first fingernails? When you grew your first cells?

What shall we call the child in the womb then? A fetus? A mystery? A mistake? A wedge issue? An inconvenience? A choice? What if science, philosophy, Scripture, and commonsense would all have us call it a person? What if the unborn child, the messy infant, the wobbly toddler, the rambunctious teenager, the college freshman, the blushing bride, the first-time mother, the working woman, the proud grammy, and the demented old friend differ not in kind but only in degree? Where in the progression does our humanity begin and end? Where does life become valuable? When are we worth something? When do human rights become our rights? What if Dr. Seuss was right after all, and a person’s a person no matter how small?

Why celebrate the right to kill what you once were? Why deny the rights of the little one who is what you are?

There is also the way our country’s Media frames the “Abortion Debates” we see today.

Framing the abortion debate as an “assault on women’s reproductive rights” plays well with abortion advocates because it paints any abortion restriction from the pro-choice point of view. But this is precisely what the debate is about, and why Americans are so conflicted on this issue.

One side believes in a woman’s unalienable right to terminate her pregnancy. The other side believes in human rights for all, including the unborn human in the womb.

If reporters and journalists were to frame all conversations about abortion as a “War on Babies,” I suspect abortion advocates would cry foul. They would protest such coverage as biased toward the pro-life view, and they’d be right. So shouldn’t we recognize that pro-life advocates are right to question the journalistic decision to adopt a pro-choice perspective in framing abortion restrictions as a “War on Women”?

When news reports use this motif or describe those who protest restrictions on abortion as “woman’s rights protestors,” they’re being unfair. They’re also being inaccurate.

Edmond Burke once said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.” He also leveled this timeless critique to culture, “What is liberty without wisdom and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without restraint. Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites; in proportion as they are disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good in preference to the flattery of knaves. . . . Society cannot exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.” (1791 ‘A Letter to a Member of the National Assembly’)

Along these same lines, John Stuart Mill made this statement, “Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”

These words from Martin Luther King Jr. also apply here, “We can never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. But I am sure that if I had lived in Germany during that time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers even though it was illegal. If I lived in a Communist country today where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I believe I would openly advocate disobeying these anti-religious laws.”

The only issue I have ever seem to come across where many of the secular, relativistic humanists of our culture today do not want the evidence of science to bear great weight on the issue, is the issue of abortion. At eight weeks in the womb, it is scientific fact that the baby has brain waves, a heartbeat, a functioning liver, functioning kidneys, a fingerprint, and recoils from a prick. Again, this is scientific fact. There is not a great debate over these truths. Yet the argument is, “That’s not a human life. That’s a woman’s body, and a woman should be able to do with her body anything she wants to do with her body.”

However, even if we throw science out the window just “for the sake of argument,” and go with the current laws of our country, this is completely untrue in so many of our other laws. If you don’t believe me, try taking off your clothes and running through the streets naked. Do you know where you’re likely going? Jail. Try to sell your body for sex. If you try to do that, chances are you might get busted. Do you know where you’re probably going? Jail… along with the guy(s) who tried to buy it. What about drugs? If it’s really true that the woman’s body is her body, and she has the right to govern her own body anyway she chooses, what happens when she takes illegal drugs or substances? If caught, that usually ends in some jail time as well. So this idea that self-autonomy rules and reigns is not completely true in many of the other domains of our laws, except around this one…

On top of that, many of the laws are so backwards. If a man were to assault a pregnant woman and the baby were to die in her womb, he’d be tried for manslaughter. Yet the same woman can go to a clinic, and for a small price (maybe even subsidized by the government), can have the baby inside of her killed, the baby who does not have her genetic code, who cannot have her same blood-type, who does not have her fingerprints, who does not share the mother’s heartbeat, lungs, brain, etc.

Of the one million plus abortions that occurred in the United States of America last year, the majority of them occurred after eight weeks, which means there’s a heartbeat, brain waves, and functioning organs. But the ‘pro-choice position’ seems to be: “That’s not human. That’s not really a soul. That’s not a person with separate rights.” In fact, we know you can potentially sustain a baby’s life after 23-24 weeks if they’re born early, if they’re born prematurely. But in many states it is still legally viable to kill that baby in the womb post-24 weeks. If we step away from the ‘life issue’ and just look at it on the surface, how can one logically buy into this unless they’re willing to suppress some truth? Scientific, logical, rational truth…

Besides the gymnastics needed to evade the scientific problems that arise in this discussion, abortion also has deeply racist effects. Abortion is discrimination based upon one’s degree of development and location, and is in fact more offensive and objectionable than racism and sexism because it almost always results in the death of its victims. Francis Beckwith explains:

Just as skin color (racism), ethnic origin (ethnocentrism), gender (sexism), national power (imperialism), and birth date (ageism) are irrelevant to one’s possession of fundamental human rights, so is one’s degree of development and location inside or outside the womb (natalism). Unfortunately, this politically correct prejudice, manifested in the practice of abortion, nearly always results in the death of its victim” (Francis Beckwith, Politically Correct Death, 12).

I really enjoy reading and studying history. In doing so, there come about times where I’m reading about a specific issue or certain topic, specifically stuff that revolves around slave trade, sexual-slave trade, and genocide, where I’m just reading history and I’m just left with this overwhelmingly crushing question: “What were they thinking?!” Not individual persons, because I completely understand how particular persons can stumble into dark things and do terrible things. I completely get that. I am a person. I’ve done some pretty dumb stuff. But my question when I read history isn’t just about persons; it’s about people. Like if you read about the slave trade and read specifically about it coming out of England, that the slave trade was really about sugar… SUGAR! The English were stealing Africans and taking them to the Caribbean to harvest sugar because they tried to use the Irish, and the sun just burned them all up. (I’m part Irish, and I can attest to this.) Literally hundreds of thousands of Africans were brutally killed for sugar, for sweet tea, and biscuits! So, I’m left with these nagging questions, “What were they thinking? What were they doing? Where were all the people who were going, ‘Hey, this is crazy!’? How did this bull continue on for as long as it did?”

What we find in history though, is that really underneath and subversively witling away at the foundation of that nonsense were faithful men and women, but the culture by and large was passive and ignored it. So, history is this long and tragic story of the fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as the words of Reinhold Niebuhr remind us: groups can be more immoral than individuals. I earnestly believe that over the next few years, science itself will help overturn some of the ridiculousness we see in our culture. I really think our children’s children will look at us and go, “What in the world? Where were you? What were you doing? Why didn’t you see this? Why didn’t you sense this? Why didn’t you stop this? How we’re you too busy to end this injustice? I mean, if you’re going to say that you believe what you believe, that a child in the womb is a life, how could you not do anything as millions were killed every year, the most helpless of helpless, the weakest of the weak, those who could not defend or speak for themselves… yet you did nothing?!”

I don’t really have any political affiliations. I vote, I have a voice, but I certainly would not label myself as a republican, democrat, libertarian, etc… and hope you and others would not paint me with any of those brushes. Life is so much bigger than political parties. I sometimes jokingly say (like a former pastor of mine) that I’m with the kingdom of God party, we already have our Guy. But in all seriousness, I find it difficult to support any man or woman who does not believe the sanctity of a human life is more valuable than convenience and relativistic personal beliefs, and is willing to sacrifice the defenseless innocent for popular opinion.

If life begins at conception… the Bible clearly weighs in it does (Psalm 139:13-16… but if I understand correctly, that doesn’t mean much to the majority of this country, and that is perfectly understandable that they wouldn’t heavily consider what the Bible says on an issue if they don’t trust or respect it as being an accurate, trustworthy, or authoritative source); however even secular science agrees with the Bible here, and would say life does begin at conception. One has to be careful playing this little game of, “Well, I define life as this amount of brainwaves.” Because, if that’s true, we have to pull the plug on a lot of people in a lot of hospitals. Our definition of personhood is another piece of this kind of relativistic schizophrenia prevalent in our culture, “it’s what I want to do” and “this is what I personally believe” type of ethic that’s driving this industry, because if we were to say, “Well, it’s only a human when it’s breathing on its own,” then we have a lot of people in ICU who need to go out, don’t we? We need to start pulling some plugs. We need to get rid of our dialysis machines. We need to get rid of our respirators. We need to stop wasting time and money keeping so many helpless people alive.

I believe this issue has become so logically insane, that I’ve found myself provoked at times by the insanity…

However, at the very same time, I do not believe that any women who has had an abortion (or anyone who has had a hand directly or indirectly in aborting a child) has gone beyond the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ. In fact, a church I served at in the past has a large ministry called “Grace Abounds” that exists for men and women who are dealing with the post-abortion stress, guilt, loss, and sorrow. There is no condemnation for the repentant person seeking help, no judgment for them. From my limited knowledge, there are also advocacy and pregnancy centers all over near where I live… the DFW Metroplex has many of them, there is one in Denton, one in Lewisville, several down in Dallas, a relatively new one up in Keller. Their sole purpose is to walk with young women, support young women, care for young women who are pregnant and don’t know what to do.

There are also numerous documentaries available that support a more “pro-life” stance. However, the critiques of many of these documentaries seem to just side step most of the issues raised and attempt to “poison the well” argumentatively, attack a “straw man,” or throw a bunch of “red herrings” into the discussion. A lot of what I’ve found to be somewhat interesting in reading the comments on these videos, is the hypocrisy, ignorance, selfishness, and false humility. (Usually, I have a very general and strict rule that I don’t read blog comments or the comments on YouTube stuff, but I just can’t seem to help myself sometimes and inevitably read some of them…)

Here’s some of what what I’ve found in reading comments I should have known better than to give my time: the graphic scenes in these documentaries are just manipulative. “That’s emotive, manipulation, not based on fact. It’s overly graphic and completely distorted just to make people feel guilty.” Now here’s the irony of that. I’m not a huge television watcher and we haven’t paid for even basic cable in at least a few years (Hulu and Netflix are our only sources of television), but I can’t remember the last time I watched television where I didn’t hear something along the lines of Sarah McLachlan singing a song with a puppy that was all beat up. So this is something I’d like to point out, nobody (that is at all sane in the head) is going to say this is the same, that this puppy has more rights and honestly requires more care than any human. Nobody is going to say it, but if you fight for the rights of the unborn, then you’re manipulative… but if you want to give little Sparky a new home, that’s a worthwhile cause. Even the great comedian Jim Gaffigan draws attention to this when he asks, “Wait, there’s still kids starving in Africa, right?”

I hope that in all of this though, as anyone reads this, you know and understand that I believe Christians are no better than non-Christians. In fact, the believer in Christ who has actually been converted and understands the Scriptures doesn’t see them-self as morally fit for God at all. In fact, they see them-self as so desperately broken that unless God sends Jesus to become the wrath-absorbing sacrifice for our lives, we have no chance at ever being restored. So, here’s the thing I just love about the evangelical Church today, and what I mean by “love” is “openly mock,” is that so many self-proclaimed Christians continually show they don’t understand the gospel by pretending we’re more moral and more devoted than everyone else. I’m sure many of you have picked up on a bit of that nonsense. Maybe just a little?

I’m not claiming to have never said anything arrogant and dumb before (or that it’ll never happen again), but I get just as sick and tired as many skeptics and non-Christians when I see things posted on Twitter and Facebook claiming “We’re more moral.” It’s why we’ve got to picket stuff. “We’re more devoted. We don’t do those kind things or make those kind of mistakes.” That’s why we have to eat at Chick-fil-A, don’t drink Starbucks, and won’t pay to see certain movies. Now, despite all the empirical data to the contrary, it’s what so many people like to preach on, it’s what so many love to talk about, it’s what some idiots even put on their t-shirts… it’s just this weird, silly, odd, confusing Bible-belt subculture. “We’re more devoted than the rest of you, and we’re more moral.” But of course that’s not true, and that’s certainly not the gospel. In fact, it’s really the enemy of the gospel. It’s the antithesis of the good news of Christ.

The gospel is not we’re more moral or we’re more devoted. The gospel is, “Jesus saves.” Saves us from what? Us… our inability to be as devoted as we need to be, our inability to be as moral as He’s commanded us to be. Like those places in the Bible where God says, “Be holy as I am holy” (1st Peter 1:13-17 is one place) – do you know anybody else having some difficulty getting there, anyone else failing to act in such a manner? Anybody else you know have some trouble being perfect? Is it just me who struggles with that one? Am I really the only one who is selfish at times, messes up, and makes mistakes… regularly? Alright, so that’s what makes the teachings of Jesus so unbelievably intriguing. Because if religion had a bumper sticker… and I’ve never been a bumper sticker fan… unless it’s a Jayhawk… (Btw, nobody drives well enough to have a bumper sticker that has Jesus’ name on it. It’s true! Seriously! Nobody! If Evangelicals were really thinking, they’d just go the complete opposite. “I don’t believe in Christ,” and then drive like a madman.) Anyway, in the end, if religion had any kind of motto, it would say this: “I obey, therefore I’m accepted.” That’s it. That’s religion. Whatever belief system you want to get into, that’s it, but that is not the teaching of Jesus. Religion says, “Morality and religious observance are means of salvation,” but that is not the message of Jesus.

Our faith teaches us that we are not just set free from fear-based behavioral modification, and the vain pursuit of pleasures that never deliver what they promise, but we are saved to the freedom of knowing that God’s affection for us does not waver despite our persistent failures and shortcomings. We have been set free to enjoy the love of our Father as adopted sons and daughters.

Religion says, “We’ve got it right and everyone else be damned,” and Jesus says, “You love the Muslim, you serve the Muslim, if necessary, you die for him. You love the Jew, you serve the Jew and if necessary, you die for them. You love the Hindu, you give up your food for the Hindu, you open your home to the Hindu, you sacrifice your own life for the Hindu. Even the angry atheist, you love him and serve him, you sacrifice your time, money, and even life for him.” Jesus says, “Love your enemies. Don’t just love your friends. How easy is it to love your friends? Even murderers can easily do that.” I mean, this is a crazy Man here. The stuff He teaches, it is not really religious in nature in any way historically as religion has been defined. The teachings of Jesus go contrary – now, not necessarily what Evangelicals teach and do, but the teachings of Jesus; they’re very, very different. His teachings are the good news, He is the gospel… Jesus is better than life. We don’t walk in fear of some tyrannical deity, but in love for our adopted Father. We are no longer slaves to our own insecurities, rather we have been set free from fear-based behavioral modifications, and into love motivated pursuit of what we long for most. We’ve been set free from the pursuit of pleasure that has as an aftertaste of guilt and shame, and into the pursuit of pleasure that leads to ever-increasing joy. We have been blood-bought, purchased out of slavery to sin. And that is the motivation for why I believe what I believe about the controversial issue of abortion.

However, some people who discuss this topic seem to believe that as a male, I don’t have any right to even enter into the conversation, let alone hold an opinion on the matter that should be viewed with any credibility since I don’t have two X chromosomes…

However, I believe truth is truth, no matter who says it, and gender does not deem one’s views irrelevant to this issue. I will respectfully disagree with that offensive position, and will continue to speak about this topic. I care a great deal about this sensitive and divisive issue in our country, have just as much libertarian freedom and right to speak about it as anyone else. Like many, I have also been deeply affected by experiences both personal and those of very close friends and family. I’ve also been affected by what I’ve read and studied over the years; as well as a great deal of dialogue composed of conversations with people who agree and disagree with me to varying degrees. So I’m not entering into this discussion with views based strictly on emotions or some detached opinion formulated without any change, growth, or careful consideration.

My parents spent years trying to be able to have kids, my mother went through surgeries, and the heartache of miscarriages. Eventually my mother was able to have children and gave birth to me when my parents were both about 30-years-old, then my three little sisters were all born within the next five years. My Dad actually didn’t finish going to school and get his degree until well after I was born. When I was growing up, we were very grateful for the immense assistance we received from the government, friends, and family. There was a period of years in my family’s life where my father was only making between $15-20k each year, and that was with four kids and a stay-at-home mother. My father worked 60+ hour work weeks for many years to provide for us. So for those who might want to dismiss me as some mind of “right-winged conservative, Christian nut-job” who just wants to see the government neglect the poor and deny help to “those who don’t help themselves.” That is simply ridiculous.

I definitely do not think any government assistance is evil and should be terminated immediately, my own family actually benefitted from it directly. However, I would dare to say that the hope and goal of such programs should be to assist the individual(s) and/or families to “get back on their own feet” or become as “self-reliable” as possible after a given amount of time. That all would of course be a very relative, case-by-case scenario, but that should at least be the end goal of such programs, shouldn’t it? The government should not be enslaving its people to depend on it. Even if some would claim that to be a bit too idealistic.

Contrary to when you believe ‘life’ and ‘human rights’ begin in said life, the Bible gives us this command: “Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute. Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.” – Psalm 82:3-4 (ESV)

Life is precious and to be protected. Sometimes in protecting life, we must give up our own comforts and self-will, but we must remember that love demands that we lay ourselves down for the sake of others. Abortion is contrary to the demands of Scripture to protect life, care for those who have not the ability to protect themselves, and humble ourselves by considering others before ourselves.

This particular passage of Scripture also gives us a deep resource for this controversial topic as we continue to discuss it and wrestle with the implications of the shifting values of our surrounding culture.

“Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, we persuade others. But what we are is known to God, and I hope it is known also to your conscience. We are not commending ourselves to you again but giving you cause to boast about us, so that you may be able to answer those who boast about outward appearance and not about what is in the heart. For if we are beside ourselves, it is for God; if we are in our right mind, it is for you. For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died; and He died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for Him who for their sake died and was raised. From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard Him thus no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to Himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making His appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake He made Him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.” – 2nd Corinthians 5:11-21 (ESV) (emphasis mine)

To those reading this who have had an abortion in the past, helped someone else have one, or been a steadfast supporter of “pro-choice” easy-elective and abortion-approving legislation, I don’t know what you’ve gone through or what painful personal experiences you’ve lived through that have served to influence and shape your beliefs on this controversial issue and the closely related issues tied to it, but I trust that you have done the best you could, with what you had, and where you were. I believe we’re all beggars in need of grace, and you will not get any hate, condemnation, or judgement from me. I would implore you to seek to know Jesus, as the Scriptures testify of Him, and rest in the hope, mercy, grace, and love He offers us all in His Gospel.

The gospel is the good news that God saves. It is the historical narrative of the triune God orchestrating the reconciliation and redemption of a broken creation and fallen creatures from Satan, sin, and its effects to the Father and each other through the birth, life, death, resurrection, and future return of the substitutionary Son, by the power of the Spirit, for God’s glory and the Church’s joy.

We should never forget that grace and forgiveness exist for all in Jesus Christ.

If you have had an abortion or have somehow been affected by an abortion, homicide, suicide or euthanasia, allow me to encourage you in the gospel. Our great God and King brought us the forgiveness of sins through His Son, Jesus, for all who believe. There is no act of taking human life that is beyond the redemption that is possible in Jesus. The Bible is full of murderers such as Moses, David, and Paul, who were redeemed to serve God. For those who are repentant, God’s grace always washes away the painful stain of sin.

My hope is by far greater than you merely adopting a view that sees abortion as murder, but that you will rest in the mercy, love, and grace of our beautiful Savior. That you would know and follow Jesus; understanding then that God sees you as His child, and your identity is in Christ, not in your sin.

—————–•—————–

Recommended Articles:

“The Gospel in an Abortion Culture” by Russell Moore

“Made in the Image of God” by Zach Lee

“We Know They Are Killing Children – All of Us Know” by John Piper

“Questions for Our Pro-Abortion Friends, Church Leaders, and Politicians” by Kevin DeYoung

“Unborn Babies Are Hearing You, Loud and Clear” article by: Meghan Holohan, NBC News

“Is the Abortion Battle a War On Women or a War Between Women?” by Trevin Wax

“Abortion and the Negation of Love” by Joe Carter

“Respecting Women is Respecting Life” by Pat Gohn

“Two Women are Behind Legalized Abortion in America: Now Both of Them Want it Reversed” by John Jalsevac

“The Truth (About Abortion) Will Set You Free” by John Piper

“Exposing the Dark Work of Abortion” by John Piper, Desiring God Ministries

“9 Things You Should Know About Roe v. Wade” by Joe Carter

“Anniversary Pictures: Remembering Roe v. Wade” by Kathleen Nielson

“10 Surprising Quotes from Abortionists”

“Beyond the Rhetoric: Gosnell and the Late-Term Reality” by John Knight

“Is Abortion Sinful?” by Geoff Ashley

“Aborted Babies and the Risk of Doing Nothing” by Michael Spielman

“Why We Should Legalize Murder for Hire” by Betsy Childs

“Why the Simple Right to Abortion is Unjust” by John Piper

“Comparing Gosnell to Newtown” by Adam Griffin

“Why the Gosnell Trial Shocks” by Jordan Sekulow

“On Abortion, Wendy Davis Doesn’t Know What She’s Talking About” article by Kirsten Powers

“9 Things You Should Know About the Gosnell Infanticide and Murder Trial” by: Joe Carter

—————–•—————–

Recommend Sermons:

“Life (2012)” by Matt Chandler

“Life (2013)” by Matt Chandler

“Abortion and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil” by: John Piper

“Christ, Culture, and Abortion” by John Piper

“Abortion: The Innocent Blood of Our Sons and Daughters” by John Piper

“Abortion, Race, Gender, and Christ” by John Piper

The Controversial Issue of Homosexuality & Gay Marriage

20130626-151734.jpg

It is not really news that there has been much discussion over the topic of gay marriage and homosexuality among people today on social media. The topic of discussion is nothing new, but the ability to discuss it in front of a broader audience this way is still a relatively young form of communication. And like much of technology, this has its strengths and weaknesses; there are great benefits to it, as well as potentially dark downsides. One downside is unfortunately demonstrated when idiotic statements abound, and cause some valid opinions, points of view, and beliefs to come off as nothing more than back-wooded bigotry or ignorant intolerance because we allow a few morons to paint the entire landscape of the discussion.

I’m not even sure the foolish “Westboro Baptist” type point of view could account for an entire 1% of the viewpoints held on this topic, but they certainly get a lot of air-play and media coverage, do they not? It almost makes it feel at times like there really is a large population of Bible-thumping bigots who just want to suppress human freedom and equality by any means available. Whenever there is a discussion panel on CNN, MSNBC, or Fox (whichever poison you prefer), they almost always seem to pick some of the most foolish people to engage in conversation. It’s like they hunt for those who hold extreme polar opinions and then feed off the ridiculous comments that are often spouted out; much of which stems more from emotion than careful consideration.

“If there is equality it is in His love, not in us.” – C.S. Lewis

One thing we all need to do, is stop pretending that the sanctity of marriage has been wonderfully displayed by the church over the past few decades and now all of a sudden it’s under serious attack with the Supreme Court declaring that DOMA and Prop 8 are unconstitutional. It’s nonsense and makes us sound like we’re in ignorant denial of the state of our culture inside and outside the church. As Christians, we should repent of our pathetic marriage cultures within the church. For too long, we’ve refused to discipline a divorce culture that has ravaged our culture as a whole. For too long, we’ve quieted our voices on the biblical witness of the distinctive missions of fathers and mothers in favor of generic messages on “parenting.”

For too long, we have acted as though the leaders of a church were basically just ‘Justices of the Peace,’ marrying people who have no accountability to the church, and in many cases were forbidden by Scripture to marry. Just because we don’t have two brides or two grooms in front of us, that doesn’t mean we’ve been holding to biblical marriage.

So many of us have this vague idea that some fifty years ago Christians comprised the mainstream in America and were fully accepted as a cultural majority. And because of that, everything in America was great, grand, and wonderful. However, history shows us that while there were many solid men and women caring for others, too many preaching “Get right and get in church,” during that time did not stand up for those who were weak and marginalized. The “good old days” so often longed for were also times of racial oppression, gender discrimination, and theological confusion. So, pining for those “moral” days of yore is like chasing a mirage. The past simply wasn’t that great for many when “Christians” had more influence.

After all, we can’t hate a people and reach a people at the same time. We are to cling to the cross, stand on the rock, and remain steadfast in the hope found only in Christ. For we alone have that hope. And it is that hope which we are commanded to share with the world, whether Christianity is the cultural norm or not.

The Christian faith believes in the authority of Scripture; so if the Scriptures are not fitting with the time, culture, societal norm, or your desires; it means there is something wrong with the times and your heart, not the Scriptures. (Unfortunately, many try to solve this problem by proof-texting and manipulating the text to appear to approve or support their twisted view.) Marriage in particular, which has always been “unequal” in a sense, the yoking together two very different kinds of bodies (different minds, different histories, different strengths, different struggles, etc.), must now be “equal,” measured only by the sincerity of one’s love and commitment. To insist on the importance of bodies in our culture is to challenge the ‘sovereign self,’ to suggest that our ethical options are limited by something we did not choose. The philosophical rejection of the Bible is often used to justify moral resistance. People don’t want to be told what to do. However, as Christians, we should agree that truth is not to be simply used as a big stick, it is a mirror. Truth is not a club, or a weapon to be wielded to beat others down, rather it is a mirror to show people their lives through a better light. Everyone wants judgement when it’s not their own foolishness being revealed. Praise Christ for grace in foolish moments and mercy for consistent failures.

The cross isn’t a recovery program, the place to simply rid yourself of undesirable behaviors and improve on what good is already there. It is a place to die. It is not a question of giving up certain sins, but of giving up one’s illusion to rights! Living a holy life comes from having an authentic, passionate relationship with God, not out of strict rules and regulations. We cannot legislate morality or see hearts changed through the law. We must strive to be aware of how we communicate the good news of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Because love without truth is sentimentality; it supports and affirms us, but it keeps us in denial about our flaws. However, truth without love is harshness; it gives us information, but in such a way that we cannot really hear it.

Apart from the power of the gospel to transform human hearts, renew minds, and redirect human lives to live for God’s glory, man would never comprehend or realize the purpose for which he was created: to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. Because in Jesus Christ, God put on flesh, and became man. In Jesus, the world saw a man who was ferociously humble. A man who was love incarnate. A man who suffered and was tempted, yet did not sin. A man who was steadfastly obedient until death, even death on a cross. A man who while being the very essence, being of the very nature and substance God, did not consider Himself equal to the Father, but submitted to the will of God and gave up His life for people undeserving of His love. In Christ’s death, He paid our debt at infinite cost to Himself. God paid our debt with His own flesh. Jesus paid our ransom to uphold the justice and righteousness of our Father; so that He could justifiably look upon us and lovingly call us son and daughter. This good news is the substance and meaning of the gospel in which we celebrate: that God became man, to save us from ourselves, and give us life. He came just like He promised, and His love will not be silent.

All humans are created in the image of God, and should be loved and respected as His image bearers. All Christians are as new creations in Jesus Christ (2nd Corinthians 5:17-21; 1st John 5:1-3), and we should remind each other that our true identity is not based on sexuality or self-expression, but on our union with Christ. The church universal, and of course the local church should strive to be a community that welcomes all those who hate their sin and struggle against it, even when that struggle involves failures and setbacks.

God’s grace came into your hands free of charge to you. We are to redistribute it the same way. The church needs to remember that we don’t need more family values in the Gospel, we need more Gospel values in our families. Jesus says in the gospel that everyone is wrong, everyone is loved, and everyone is called to recognize this and change.

Real transformative heart change won’t happen through simply ‘trying harder’ and following the rules better, but only through encountering the radical grace of God. We cannot legislate morality or expect the government to force everyone to act strictly in accordance with the Christian worldview. Religion stresses holiness over grace. Irreligion stresses freedom over holiness. Christianity is freedom through grace that leads to holiness. The greatest threat to the church isn’t atheism, materialism, abortion, or gay marriage, but the moralism that celebrates a righteousness which doesn’t come from Christ. We are all far worse than we ever dared to imagine, yet in Christ, we are far more loved than we ever dreamed we could be.

————•————

Some recommended articles:

“How to Survive a Cultural Crisis” by: Mark Dever

“How Should Same-Sex Marriage Change the Church’s Witness?” by: Russell Moore

“The Church and Homosexuality: Ten Commitments” by Kevin DeYoung

“Old Testament Law and the Charge of Inconsistency” by Tim Keller

“Debunking Marriage Myths | The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood” by: Steve Watters

“Sex Without Bodies” by: Andy Crouch

“Prop 8, DOMA, and the Christian Response” by: Ed Stetzer

“Marriage in God’s Story” by: John Smidt

“Jesus and Homosexuality” by: Geoff Ashley

“The New Purpose of Marriage” by: Collin Hansen

“Homosexuality is Not Me” by: Matt Moore

“Judaism’s Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism Rejected Homosexuality” by: Dennis Prager

“Why Gay Marriage is Good (and Bad) for the Church” by: Trevin Wax

“Why is Homosexuality Wrong?” by: John Piper

“How Might Christians Respond To The Question of Homosexual Marriage?” by: Doug Hankins

“DOMA and the Rock” by Rosaria Champagne Butterfield

“What the Bible Really Still Says About Homosexuality” by: Kevin DeYoung

“What Does God Expect From Gay People?” by: Matt Moore

“Orienting on Homosexual Orientation” by Nick Roen

“Honesty, Truth and Homosexuality” by Geoff Ashley

“God and the Gay Christian” by Samuel Allberry

“Why No Denomination Will Survive the Homosexuality Crisis” by: Kevin DeYoung

“The Gay Community and That One Time Jesus Called Me the ‘N-word'” by Sammy Adebiyi

“What You Should Know About ‘LGBTQ'” by: Joe Carter

“From Radical Lesbian to Redeemed Christian” by: Tony Reinke

“Discerning the Will of God Concerning Homosexuality and Marriage” by: John Piper

“How Can Homosexuality Be Wrong if It Doesn’t Harm Anyone?” by: Matt Smethurst

“9 Things You Should Know About the Supreme Court’s Same-Sex Marriage Cases” by: Joe Carter

“A Level Playing Field” by: Paul David Tripp

“Can a Gay Person Be a Christian? It Depends On What You Mean.” by: Matt Moore

“On Winning the Marriage Debate” by: Eric Teetsel

“Christian Responsibility and Mosaic Law” by: Geoff Ashley

“Fornicating on the Battlefield” by: Tony Anderson

“An Open Letter From a Gay Sister in Christ” by: Hunter Baker

“Being Gay at Jerry Falwell’s University” by: Brandon Ambrosino

“Rick Warren on Gay Marriage: ‘Tolerance Does Not Mean Approval'” by: Stoyan Zaimov

“I’m Gay and I Oppose Same-sex Marriage” by: Doug Mainwaring

“Sinister New Case Shows Marriage McCarthyism Is Up and Running” by: Mike Judge

“Love and the Inhumanity of Same-Sex Marriage” by: Jonathan Leeman

“Love Warns, Love Rebukes” by: Paul David Tripp

“Grace-Driven Effort and Sanctification” by Sam Schabel

————•————

Some recommended sermons:

“Homosexuality” by Matt Chandler

“The Other Dark Exchange: Homosexuality (Part 1)” by: John Piper

“The Other Dark Exchange: Homosexuality (Part 2)” by: John Piper