If I Don’t Like It, It Must Be Wrong!

This one is a clear example of the logic behind the new morality. Not only is it wrong in its sentiments, it is one-sided. You’ll see…

Scottythinks.com

In Matthew Vines’ book, GodandtheGayChristian, he shares an amazingly subjective interpretation of Matthew 7:15-20. Here’s the passage from the NIV:

15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

An example of how Vines interprets this passage can be seen in a statement he makes about celibacy. He writes:

Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 10:13, “[God] will not let you be tempted beyond…

View original post 554 more words

Just Another Stupid Example of Cultural Appropriation

It is almost hard to believe that this kind of thing is happening in America. Not just happening, but defining who we are.

First let me say I don’t give a hoot about the Grammy’s, famous people, pop culture, autographs, of famous people or people who have won Grammy’s, etc. I don’t give even a fraction of a hoot. Don’t get me wrong: I have a warehouse full of high-quality hoots to give, but not to the things previous listed. HOWEVER, this stuff is too ludicrous not to mention.

J. Lo’s Motown Mess

Apparently, at last nights Grammy’s, Jennifer Lopez performed a medley of Motown hits. It’s Motown’s 60th anniversary, so Lopez and the Grammy’s pay tribute. Well, that got Twitter ablaze with criticism for J. Lo.

Now the writer of the InStyle.com piece summed it up this way,


The medley, which saw J. Lo shimmying and quick-changing to classics like “Dancing in the Street,” “Please Mr. Postman,” “Do You Love Me,” and “The Best Things in Life Are Free,” received criticism on Twitter on a very simple basis: she’s not a Motown singer.

That is simply not true. The reason for the criticism? J. Lo is not black.

You can find more Tweets like these here.

What is my point, you ask?

My point is to draw attention to the sheer idiocy of cultural appropriation. Think about what is being said here. Because J. Lo is not black, she shouldn’t perform songs made famous by black artists. Did anyone stop to think that the highest form of praise is imitation? In this case, J. Lo (certainly a star) pays tribute to Motown and its artists. What do people think “paying tribute means”? You don’t pay tribute to yourself, others who have appreciated you pay tribute to you for what you have done.

  • Do we really want only black artists to sing songs made famous by other black artists?
  • Do we really want to monitor whether young ladies are wearing Japanese kimonos to prom?
  • Is it ok if I cook Mexican if I am not Mexican?
  • Do we really want to segregate everything like that?

I’m telling you, future generations are going to examine Americans during this era and they are going to write volumes about how stupid we are!

John Allen Chau: Martyr?

Click here to read about John from those at ORU who knew him…

The question at the heart of the Christ and Culture concept is to consider what manner of communication and approach the Church take pursue when it intersects with the culture at large. It is to contemplate, “If asked, what should I say to the culture about Jesus?”

The Sentinelese People as Museum Artifact

Among those who have commented on this incident with John Allen Chau and the Sentinelese people are those who support the murderous response of the Sentinelese to Chau. Some have done it on the basis of protecting them from disease, some on the basis of having a right to protect their borders, and (I’m convinced) some just want to preserve this people group as though it were a museum artifact. John Chau just felt they had a right to know Jesus.

Prayerfully Intentional

Don’t listen to the spin that the world is giving to this event. Even some in the Church (if they truly are in the Church) are being critical of Chau as though this were a sophmorish, foolish act. I have it on good authority that the opposite is true.

They say that all people are connected to all other people by six or less points of separation. I did not know John Chau, but I know someone who did—someone who had even discussed this sacrificial mission. And that person knows those who knew Chau even more intimately than that. Those who knew him best know that this was as genuine and meaningful an act of Christian love and sacrifice as what Jim Elliot when he went to the Auca Indians.

The Mantle of John Elliot

Remember John Allen Chau. Fruit for the Kingdom of God will come from his selflessness—fruit that remains.

Want to Be a Part of What John Allen Chau Did?

Pray for the Sentinelese people that they would hear about Jesus and follow Him.

The Liberals’ Most Cherished Law

It is dumbfounding that when it comes to choosing judges one main “value” and “right” always makes its way to the top of the list for liberals: their desire and passion that women continue to be able to stop the beating hearts of their unborn children if they so desire.

Think about that! More than anything else, liberals want abortion. What does that even mean? How does a person with that value system even find peace in their lives.

Sure, conservatives boil it down to abortion as well. But they stand on the side of life, not death! They stand on the side of acknowledging that personal freedoms must always consider who that freedom might be hurting.

Ask any five year old, “Should mommy kill the baby in her belly?” and you discover that even a child knows abortion is wrong.

Why the focus on homosexuality, abortion, evolution? Aren’t all sins the same in God’s eyes? Part 1

By Scott Fowler

I am frequently asked if all sins are equally bad or if some sins are worse than others. Sometimes I just hear the statement being made in passing, “Well, we know that all sins are equal in God’s eyes.” Usually, this idea is tied to the sentiment suggesting the Church should not spend so much time harping against homosexuality, abortion, and evolution (the “big 3”), and spend more time dealing with Christians who lie, cheat on their taxes, and commit adultery. Surely those things are just as destructive as the big 3.

Without a doubt, sin separates us from God. And, barring a discussion on the possibility that the punishment of hell will be intensified upon its inhabitants by degrees based on the degree of their sinfulness, we can agree that once a person goes to hell it may not matter at that point whether it was murder or lying or tax evasion that sent him or her there. He or she is separated from God.

So, why does the believing Church spend so much time talking about the big 3? Aren’t all sins equally bad in God’s eyes? Let’s gradually get to the first question by starting with the second. And let’s begin the discussion by asking a series of questions and by considering a few different scenarios.

Is there a difference between the sin being committed by a young man and woman, both single, both unmarried, who are engaging in premarital sex, and a man and a woman, both married to other people, having an affair with one another? How do we normally feel about the young couple that doesn’t want to wait compared to how we feel about the couple cheating on their spouses? There is something categorically different between the sin of the young couple and the sin of the adulterers. Both couples are engaged in damnable sins,1  but there is something extra deceitful and hurtful happening with the adulterous couple. They are in deeper. They are not only disobeying God but they are breaking their vows and hurting their children and living a lie! Perhaps the question is not “Is one sin is worse than the other?” but rather “How deeply mired in bondage is one couple compared to the other?” or “How many people are hurt by the sin of either couple?” Let’s keep going with more questions and another scenario.

Is there anything inherently different between the sin of adultery happening between a man and a woman and the same-sex sexual relations happening between two gay men? Both “couples” are committing damnable sins,2 but something is different. While we could never condone or justify the sins of the adulterous couple, we are not surprised when people find themselves in the midst of emotional and physical attraction and falling into the trap of adultery. Why? Because, while an adulterous affair is shameful and sinful, we understand that men are attracted to women and vice versa and, given the right set of circumstances, they can all too easily find themselves in a weakened state and falling into the grossest of sins. And while we would condemn such acts, we would not normally say that there was something unnatural about what they are doing, beyond the view of what is natural for believing Christians, because it is normal for men to be attracted to women, etc. The issue in this case is that the man and the woman have failed to stay faithful to God and to the ordained relationships they have already committed to. Similarly, we do not say that a man has sinned because he has the capacity to be tempted by looking at another woman, but we would say that he is responsible for what he does with the temptation.

But when it comes to homosexuality and two men or two women in same-sex sexual relations with one another, we do not simply say that they have done the wrong thing with temptation. Much more is involved. While it is true that the man and the woman who are having an adulterous affair with one another have indeed gone against God’s laws by giving themselves to forbidden sexual relationships, their violation is different in kind than that of the two men or two women involved in forbidden same-sex sexual relationships. The homosexual relationship represents a twisting of God’s laws in a much deeper, more deviant way. God certainly condemns sex outside of marriage and sex that violates the marriage bed and vows, but He has not condemned human heterosexual sexuality. He reserves the right to decide for us who we should mate with, but He has not condemned the human sexual act between a man and a woman. He has, in fact, endorsed it and encouraged it within the bounds of His laws. In the case of homosexuality, He has condemned the act altogether; forbidden it. So, homosexuality is in a different category because it twists what God originally intended in a way that premarital sex and adultery between a man and a woman does not. There is no way for the homosexual act to ever be sanctioned by God.

If we imagine a person simply making a random decision to engage in a same-sex sexual act, we could also imagine saying to that person, “Don’t choose to do that anymore. It’s wrong.” We might not understand why a person would do such a thing, but there it is. But when we come to the realization that gays and lesbians have this desire (not born with it but somehow mired in it) and that they approve of it, now we are dealing with individuals who, in the face of God, are not just saying we want to have sex, but we want to have sex in a way that you have said is not natural, normal, or accepted.

As mentioned above, perhaps the question is not degrees of sinfulness, but degrees of bondage. The stronghold of homosexuality is different in its intensity than, say, a little boy of four who has trouble telling the truth, although Stephen Charnock wrote,

“All sin is founded in secret atheism. Atheism is the spirit of every sin; all the floods of impieties in the world break in at the gate of a secret atheism, and though several sins may disagree with one another, yet, like Herod and Pilate against Christ, they join hand in hand against the interest of God. Though lusts and pleasures be diverse, yet they are all united in disobedience to him. All the wicked inclinations in the heart, and struggling motions, secret repining, self-applauding confidences in our own wisdom, strength, &c. [sic], envy, ambition, revenge, are sparks from this latent fire; the language of every one of these is, I would be a Lord to myself, and would not have a God superior to me.3 

For this reason, we don’t take lightly the little boy who tends to lie. But we understand that little boys and girls sometimes have trouble with the truth and need teaching concerning the reason the truth matters. And although we have all known people who are liars, it is rare to find someone who vouches for lying or claims that a life based on falsehood is a noble path to choose.

What I am trying to say is that at least one of the reasons that homosexuality is seen differently than other behaviors that the Church considers to be sinful is that the bondage and the stronghold that it represents is significantly different and arguably more difficult to deal with than the occasional temptation to swear when one hits his or her thumb with a hammer.

I will deal with the first part of the question in Part 2, but let me finish this article by saying that I am more and more sensitive to the argument against the believing Church that when it speaks against sin, particularly against homosexuality, that it is of necessity spewing hate out for homosexuals outside of the faith and now more and more inside even the evangelical church. To those arguments I would say that indeed many Christians have spewed hatred for the sin and that hatred of sin has been virtually indistinguishable from the feeling they have expressed for the homosexuals themselves. For that I am deeply sorry and in agreement that Jesus loves the homosexual and so does the true believing Church. However, in our present culture, any expression of disagreement is seen as hate. But the believing Church has no choice but to speak the truth. So, all I know to do is to genuinely love people, declare the truth from that genuine love, and become sensitive to ways in which we can better communicate that genuine love.

Stay tune for Part 2.

1 Revelation 21:8 says: But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”

2 Along with Revelation 21:8, Romans 1:18-32.

3 Stephen Charnock, B.D., Discourses Upon the Existence and Attributes of God, Volume I (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987; reprinted from the 1853 edition by Robert Carter & Brothers), page 93, emphasis mine

 

Scott Fowler is the founder of the Christ and Culture Initiative. He is a pastor/theologian living in New York. You can learn more about him at:  http://scottythinks.wordpress.com/about/