Abraham Lincoln was fond of asking, "If you call a dog's tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?" "Five," his audience would invariably answer. "No," he'd politely respond, " the correct answer is four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg."
Like Lincoln's associates, many of our fellow citizens - including many Christians - appear to fall for the notion that changing a definition causes a change in essence. A prime example is the attempt to change the definition of marriage to include same-sex unions. Simply calling such relationships "gay marriages," many believe, will actually make them marriages. Such reasoning, however, is as flawed as thinking that changing tail to leg changes the function of the appendage.
Consider the change that must occur in our tail/leg example. A dog's tail cannot perform the same functions as its leg. He can't use his tail to run or swim or scratch an itch. In order to use the term for both parts, we must discard all qualities that make a tail different from a leg. The new meaning of leg will require that we exclude any difference of form ( for example, we can no longer say that a paw can be found at the end of a leg) or function (for example, legs are not necessarily used for standing). In other words, by redefining the term tail we have not made it equivalent in form or function to a leg: we've merely stripped the term leg of its previous meaning and made it as generic a term as appendage.
The same is true with the attempts to redefine marriage. Because marriage requires the specific form of a union of man and woman (Gen. 2:24), applying the term to same-sex unions alters the very concept of what a marriage is for and what functions it takes.
For example, a significant percentage of people in same-sex sexual partnerships do not view monogamy or sexual exclusivity as part of the meaning of marriage. They may still use the term monogamy, but they have redefined that term too, in a way that means "monogamish," that is, relationships in which they are emotionally intimate with only one partner yet remain free to engage in sexual infidelities or group sexual activity. Changing the definition of marriage to include same-sex unions does not make it more inclusive, but rather more exclusive, since it requires excluding all the functions that were previously beieved to be essential to the institutiion of marriage (for example, sexual fidelity).
Some Christians, recognizing the change that occurs because of the redefinition of marriage, argue that we need a two-track system: marriage as defined by the state and marriage as defined by the church. The problem with this view is that it also misunderstands the nature of marriage. Neither the state nor the church has the authority to change the essential nature of marriage, since the institution was neither created by nor belongs to either the church or the state. As Dr. R. C. Sproul wrote in a previous issue of Tabletalk (June 2013): Marriage is ordained and instituted by God - that is to say, marriage did not just spring up arbitrarily out of social conventions or human taboos. Marriage was not invented by men but by God.
Because the three institutions of church, state, and marriage have interdependent yet independent existance, they can decide whether to recognize each other's legitimacy, but they cannot delineate each other's boundaries. In this way, the relationship is similar to nation-states. The U.S government, for example, can decide to "recognize" the state of Israel, but it cannot redefine the country in a way that contracts its border to exclue the Gaza Strip. The U.S. either recognizes Israel as it defines itself or it rejects its legitimacy altogether.
Some Christians may even concede that while the state doesn't truly have the authority to redefine marriage, we should go along with the legal fiction for the sake of the gospel witness. Although such Christians may have the best of intentions, they are actually subverting the very gospel they want to protect.
In acceding to laws that redefine marriage, they are doing the very opposite of what Jesus calls us to do: they are hating their neighbors, including their gay and lesbian neighbors. You do not love your neighbor by encouraging them to engage in actions that invoke God's wrath (Ps. 5:4-5; Rom. 1:18). As Christians, we may be required to tolerate ungodly behavior, but the moment we begin to endorse it, we too become suppressors of the truth. You cannot love your neighbor and want to see them excluded from the kingdom of Christ (Eph. 5:5).
What is needed is for the church to have the courage to speak the truth of the gospel: we cannot love our neighbor and tolerate unrepentant rebellion against God. We cannot continue with the "go along to get along" mentality that is leading those we love to destruction. We must speak the Word of God with boldness (Acts 4:31) and accept the fact that those who have fallen away may not ever return. We must choose this day whom we will serve. Will we stand with the only wise God or with the foolish idol-makers of same-sex marriage?
(by Joe Carter, Tabletalk, February 2014,www.ligonier.org)
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Thursday, February 13, 2014
Our Anchor in a Changing World
"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me." Galatians 2:20
"But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident; for, The just shall live by faith." Galatians 3:11
We live in a rapidly changing world and hardly know what to depend on from day to day, but we desperately need something unchanging and secure to anchor our lives to and God has provided that security. It is called the Gospel of Jesus Christ and it is 100% secure and trustworthy.
Paul preached and lived the Gospel of JesusChrist. He claimed that he lived by faith in the Son of God and assures us that we can and must live the same way.
Things didn't always go smoothly for Paul! He was attacked by mobs, falsely accused by his enemies, arrested by the Roman authorities and saw the inside of several Roman jails. The future often looked bleak for Paul, but his faith in the Gospel and in the Lord Jesus never wavered. He knew, as we must learn, that we cannot always depend on things as they appear to be, but we must depend on things to be as God promises that they shall be and that is called "walking by faith."
Someone wrote the following words;
'Tis better to walk by faith than sight,
in this path of ours and mine;
And the pitch-black night, when there's no outer light
is the time for faith to shine.
The world of our generation has a lot of serious problems and we hear a lot of proposed solutions. No doubt some are good and some not so good but of one thing I am sure, denying the claims of God and breaking His commandments is not a good solution. Many years ago a man called "The Preacher" wrote, "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is the whole duty of man." (Ecclesiastes 12:13)
There will, no doubt, be political and judicial decisions made in the days to come that will be, as we see things, definitely wrong. There are now and will be more, developments on the world scene that are scary but don't be troubled. We are men and women who, "...walk by faith, not by sight." (2nd Corinthians 5:7) and our lives are controlled by and our hope is built on, "...things not seen as yet...." (Hebrews 11:7). Like Moses of old we shall "...endure, as seeing Him who is invisible." (Hebrews 11:27). (Invisible to the eyes of unbelief but seen by eyes of faith).
In the end it will be as God has determined.
(Pastor Bill Cummins, Sheridan, Wyoming, drbc@bresnan.net)
"But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident; for, The just shall live by faith." Galatians 3:11
We live in a rapidly changing world and hardly know what to depend on from day to day, but we desperately need something unchanging and secure to anchor our lives to and God has provided that security. It is called the Gospel of Jesus Christ and it is 100% secure and trustworthy.
Paul preached and lived the Gospel of JesusChrist. He claimed that he lived by faith in the Son of God and assures us that we can and must live the same way.
Things didn't always go smoothly for Paul! He was attacked by mobs, falsely accused by his enemies, arrested by the Roman authorities and saw the inside of several Roman jails. The future often looked bleak for Paul, but his faith in the Gospel and in the Lord Jesus never wavered. He knew, as we must learn, that we cannot always depend on things as they appear to be, but we must depend on things to be as God promises that they shall be and that is called "walking by faith."
Someone wrote the following words;
'Tis better to walk by faith than sight,
in this path of ours and mine;
And the pitch-black night, when there's no outer light
is the time for faith to shine.
The world of our generation has a lot of serious problems and we hear a lot of proposed solutions. No doubt some are good and some not so good but of one thing I am sure, denying the claims of God and breaking His commandments is not a good solution. Many years ago a man called "The Preacher" wrote, "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is the whole duty of man." (Ecclesiastes 12:13)
There will, no doubt, be political and judicial decisions made in the days to come that will be, as we see things, definitely wrong. There are now and will be more, developments on the world scene that are scary but don't be troubled. We are men and women who, "...walk by faith, not by sight." (2nd Corinthians 5:7) and our lives are controlled by and our hope is built on, "...things not seen as yet...." (Hebrews 11:7). Like Moses of old we shall "...endure, as seeing Him who is invisible." (Hebrews 11:27). (Invisible to the eyes of unbelief but seen by eyes of faith).
In the end it will be as God has determined.
(Pastor Bill Cummins, Sheridan, Wyoming, drbc@bresnan.net)
Saturday, February 8, 2014
Appearance Is Everything?
An advertising agency wrote seeking our ministry's business: "Let's face it: appearance is everything. Let us help you enhance your image."
My first thought was that this agency doesn't reaize they are dealing with a Christian organization. Then it occurred to me that this is precisely the impression many unbelievers get from the state of evangelical Christianity today: appearance is everything. Truth and reality often take a back seat to image.
That mentality has long been a plague on the church, but in recent years it has reached epidemic proportions. Sadly enough, Christian leaders are often the most image-conscious of all. Whole churches are built on the philosophy that image is everything, while truth must be downplayed so that the church can appear in more appealing dress.
For example, in order to appear as genial and nonthreatening as possible, many churches forgo the practice of church discipline altogether, lest the all-important image be tarnished. Sin in the body is tolerable as long as the carefully polished veneer remains in place.
Worst of all, this attitude is pervasive at the individual level. Far too many Christians live as if a pretense of righteousness were as good as the real thing. That is precisely the error committed by most of the Pharisees of Jesus' day. They lived as though external compliance with the law fulfilled all the demands of divine righteousness while they harbored iniquity in their hearts or indulged in gross sin secretly.
Again and again, Christ rebuked the pharisees for their fastidious observance of the external, ceremonial law - married with a wanton neglect of the law's fundamental moral requirements. The Pharisees' teaching placed so much emphasis on external appearance that it was commonly believed that evil thoughts were not really sinful as long as they did not become acts. The Pharisees and their followers became utterly preoccupied with appearing righteous. Jesus likened them to white-washed tombs - spotless on the outside but filled wth corruption and defilement on the inside.
The notion that morality is merely external underlies all forms of hypocrisy. It is the very error Jesus decried in His exposition of the moral law in the Sermon on the Mount. The central lesson He underscored was this: external appearance is not what matters most.
Jesus' exposition of the law is a devastating blow against the lie that image is everything. Our Lord taught repeatedly that sin bottled up on the inside, concealed from everyone else's view, is no less damning than sin that manifests itself in the worst forms of ungodly behavior (Matt. 5:21-30). As Christians, we must never think of secret sins as somehow less wicked or more respectable than the sins everyone sees.
(Dr. John MacArthur, pastor of Grace Community Church, Sun Valley, Calif. and president of The Master's College and Seminary. Tabletalk, February 2014, www.ligonier.org)
My first thought was that this agency doesn't reaize they are dealing with a Christian organization. Then it occurred to me that this is precisely the impression many unbelievers get from the state of evangelical Christianity today: appearance is everything. Truth and reality often take a back seat to image.
That mentality has long been a plague on the church, but in recent years it has reached epidemic proportions. Sadly enough, Christian leaders are often the most image-conscious of all. Whole churches are built on the philosophy that image is everything, while truth must be downplayed so that the church can appear in more appealing dress.
For example, in order to appear as genial and nonthreatening as possible, many churches forgo the practice of church discipline altogether, lest the all-important image be tarnished. Sin in the body is tolerable as long as the carefully polished veneer remains in place.
Worst of all, this attitude is pervasive at the individual level. Far too many Christians live as if a pretense of righteousness were as good as the real thing. That is precisely the error committed by most of the Pharisees of Jesus' day. They lived as though external compliance with the law fulfilled all the demands of divine righteousness while they harbored iniquity in their hearts or indulged in gross sin secretly.
Again and again, Christ rebuked the pharisees for their fastidious observance of the external, ceremonial law - married with a wanton neglect of the law's fundamental moral requirements. The Pharisees' teaching placed so much emphasis on external appearance that it was commonly believed that evil thoughts were not really sinful as long as they did not become acts. The Pharisees and their followers became utterly preoccupied with appearing righteous. Jesus likened them to white-washed tombs - spotless on the outside but filled wth corruption and defilement on the inside.
The notion that morality is merely external underlies all forms of hypocrisy. It is the very error Jesus decried in His exposition of the moral law in the Sermon on the Mount. The central lesson He underscored was this: external appearance is not what matters most.
Jesus' exposition of the law is a devastating blow against the lie that image is everything. Our Lord taught repeatedly that sin bottled up on the inside, concealed from everyone else's view, is no less damning than sin that manifests itself in the worst forms of ungodly behavior (Matt. 5:21-30). As Christians, we must never think of secret sins as somehow less wicked or more respectable than the sins everyone sees.
(Dr. John MacArthur, pastor of Grace Community Church, Sun Valley, Calif. and president of The Master's College and Seminary. Tabletalk, February 2014, www.ligonier.org)
Saturday, February 1, 2014
Bowing To Shariah
Islamofascism: Caving to pressure from Muslim groups, the Pentagon has relaxed uniform rules to allow Islamic beards, turbans and hijabs. It's a major win for political correctness and a big loss for military unit cohesion.
Also, the sharia-compliant regulation threatens to expand the jihadi Fifth Column that counter-intelligence already is dealing with in the wake of theFort Hood massacre. The FBI is tracking more than 100 suspected jihadists within the military.
Making special accommodations for Islam will only attract more Muslims into the military at a time when two recent terror cases highlight the ongoing danger of Muslims in uniform.
Earlier this month, a former Army soldier was sentenced to seven years in prison in a terror investigation. Craig Benedict Baxam, a Muslim convert, was said to have trained with al-Qaida's branch in Somalia. In statements to federal agents, he justified violent jihad and vowed to fight the U.S. to defend Islamic lands.
Also this month, Homeland Security arrested an Iranian-American working for the Defense Department as a contract engineer. Mozaffar Khazaee was busted sending secret documents to Tehran.
In justifying the Pentagon's new religious accommodations, which took effect last week, a spokesman said they would "reduce both the instances and perception of discrimination among those whose religious expressions are less familiar to the command." The terror-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations, which lobbied for the beard exemption, cheered it as a civil rights victory.
Don't be misled. The beard now allowed is the same beard required by all jihadists. Recall that the Fort Hood shooter insisted on wearing a beard at his trial.
The administration is pushing sharia-compliance on the private sector. Last month, it successfully sued McDonanld's over its dress code after the burger chain refused to let a Muslim worker grow a beard. McDonald's insisted it was an issue of hygiene and food sanitation. Yet after Shaheed Khan invoked Islam, the company buckled and agreed to allow Islamic beards and put managers through Muslim sensitivity training. It even forked over $50,000 to Khan.
What next? Will McDonald's be forced to use only halal-butchered meat in its burgers? Will the Pentagon court-martial non-Muslim soldiers for mishandling their bunkmates' copies of the Quran?
The left dismisses as alarmist fears about sharia law creeping into Western society. Yet the evidence is all around us.
(Investor's Business Daily, January 30, 2014, www.investors.com)
Also, the sharia-compliant regulation threatens to expand the jihadi Fifth Column that counter-intelligence already is dealing with in the wake of theFort Hood massacre. The FBI is tracking more than 100 suspected jihadists within the military.
Making special accommodations for Islam will only attract more Muslims into the military at a time when two recent terror cases highlight the ongoing danger of Muslims in uniform.
Earlier this month, a former Army soldier was sentenced to seven years in prison in a terror investigation. Craig Benedict Baxam, a Muslim convert, was said to have trained with al-Qaida's branch in Somalia. In statements to federal agents, he justified violent jihad and vowed to fight the U.S. to defend Islamic lands.
Also this month, Homeland Security arrested an Iranian-American working for the Defense Department as a contract engineer. Mozaffar Khazaee was busted sending secret documents to Tehran.
In justifying the Pentagon's new religious accommodations, which took effect last week, a spokesman said they would "reduce both the instances and perception of discrimination among those whose religious expressions are less familiar to the command." The terror-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations, which lobbied for the beard exemption, cheered it as a civil rights victory.
Don't be misled. The beard now allowed is the same beard required by all jihadists. Recall that the Fort Hood shooter insisted on wearing a beard at his trial.
The administration is pushing sharia-compliance on the private sector. Last month, it successfully sued McDonanld's over its dress code after the burger chain refused to let a Muslim worker grow a beard. McDonald's insisted it was an issue of hygiene and food sanitation. Yet after Shaheed Khan invoked Islam, the company buckled and agreed to allow Islamic beards and put managers through Muslim sensitivity training. It even forked over $50,000 to Khan.
What next? Will McDonald's be forced to use only halal-butchered meat in its burgers? Will the Pentagon court-martial non-Muslim soldiers for mishandling their bunkmates' copies of the Quran?
The left dismisses as alarmist fears about sharia law creeping into Western society. Yet the evidence is all around us.
(Investor's Business Daily, January 30, 2014, www.investors.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)