A Sexual Revolution for Young Evangelicals? No.

In any discussion about the future of religion in America, especially as it relates to stalled growth in churches and denominations, those outside our religious communities find one theory especially compelling. This is the idea: that young Evangelicals are frustrated with Christian orthodoxy’s strict standards of sexual morality. We’re told that these young Evangelicals will soon revolutionize our churches with liberalized views on same-sex marriage, premarital sex, gender identity, and so on. But a new study by a University of Texas sociologist finds that Evangelical Christians ages 18 to 39 are resisting liberalizing trends in the culture.

The suggestion of a shift in attitudes does sound plausible. Indeed, one of us has warned for years that conservative Evangelicals are often “slow-motion sexual revolutionaries,” adjusting to the ambient culture on, for instance, divorce in ways that have harmed our witness and compromised the Biblical message. How much more vulnerable would Evangelicals be in a culture that is shifting roller-coaster fast on the definition of marriage itself and related issues? But recent data suggest otherwise.   Continue at Russell Moore

There Is No ‘Third Way’ — Southern Baptists Face a Moment of Decision (and so will you)

Southern Baptists will be heading for Baltimore in just a few days, and the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention is to be held in a city that has not hosted the convention since 1940. This time, Baptists attending the meeting will face an issue that would not have been imaginable just a few years ago, much less in 1940 — a congregation that affirms same-sex relationships.

Just days before the convention, news broke that a congregation in suburban Los Angeles has decided to affirm same-sex sexuality and relationships. In an hour-long video posted on the Internet, Pastor Danny Cortez explains his personal change of mind and position on the issue of homosexuality and same-sex relationships. He also addressed the same issues in a letter posted at Patheos.com.   Continue at Al Mohler

See also: A Resolution on Transgender for the SBC

The End of Morality Laws? Not Exactly

Does the legalization of same-sex marriage and polygamy mean the end of all morality laws? George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley thinks so, and he openly celebrates the death of all morals legislation—or, at least he says he does.

Turley was the lead counsel in the “Sister Wives” case in Utah that legalized polygamy in that state last month, a reversal of the very morals legislation that the U. S. government required of Utah for that territory to be admitted as a state in the late nineteenth century.

Here is how Professor Turley explained the case:  Continue at Al Mohler

Should the Church 'Get Out of the Marriage Business'?

Christians are frequently tempted to excuse themselves from the kerfuffle over same-sex marriage by insisting that the church should get out of the marriage business altogether. Many suggest that we should separate the conception of marriage into the "sacred" and the "secular." These evangelicals aren't questioning the Scripture's teaching on homosexuality. Some Christians just want to bypass debate and focus on weightier matters within the church's walls—like preserving the theology of marriage from being corrupted by democratic fiat.

This argument assumes that Christians can maintain and safeguard their own definition of marriage by refusing to impose a particular viewpoint in the public square. Often with good intentions, some Christians wish to privatize marriage into a strictly ecclesial practice, treating it like we would the Lord's Supper or baptism.

But therein lays the problem: The church's theology on marriage, while certainly ecclesial, isn't sectarian. Marriage leads one outside the walls of the church and into the public square because marriage, by design, reveals a certain cosmology about our essence as being made male and female. Marriage has an innately public purpose by bringing together the two halves of humanity. If you embrace man as man and woman as woman, you might be on the losing end of a culture war over marriage, but you'll be on the side of truth when the dust settles about human nature.    Continue at Andrew Walker

Warning All Churches

Over this year, there have been a number of news reports on another movement in the church advocating for the acceptance of homosexual behavior and same-sex relationships. Matthew Vines, an openly homosexual 23-year-old student at Harvard University, posted a video on YouTube of a speech he gave on homosexuality and the Bible. In the talk, he claims repeatedly that God’s Word does not condemn monogamous same-sex relationships.

Now, a recent report from the Christian Post highlighted the amount of compromise happening within the church on this issue. The headline of the article explains, “50 ‘Hand-Picked’ Christians Trained To Convince Churches To Re-Interpret Scripture’s Gay Boundaries.” Vines apparently hosted a training conference recently in his home state of Kansas for Christians who want to convince their churches to accept same-sex relationships.   Continue at Ken Ham

Are Your Church’s Governing Documents Ready for a Post-DOMA World?

One of the more interesting discoveries I made when researching Baptist polity a few years ago was the lost practice of “recognition councils.” Most Baptists are familiar with ordination councils, in which a local church calls together a group of elders and messengers from like-minded area churches to examine an aspiring minister’s fitness for ministry, and thereafter to advise the church either to pursue ordination, to delay ordination until the examinee is more fit for the ministry, or to deny ordination entirely. Recognition councils occur when a new assembly calls together a group of elders from like-minded area churches to examine its governing documents, and thereafter to advise the assembly to pursue chartering, to delay chartering until its documents are in order, or even to abandon entirely its plan for a new church.

Typically, recognition councils examined a prospective church’s constitution and by-laws, doctrinal statement, and covenant. But there are a great many other documents that may also be subjected to examination: mission statements, philosophies of ministry, employee job descriptions, teacher policies, nursery policies, facilities-usage policies, etc. What I’d like to suggest in this post is that the lost practice of recognition councils be formally revived, or, at the very least, that churches informally pool their collective minds to assist one another in creating ecclesiastical documents that are orthodox, orthoprax, and in our litigious society, as litigation-proof as is possible.   Continue at Mark Snoeberger

Same-Sex Marriage and the American Church

On Wednesday, five members of the Supreme Court struck down a 1996 decision by the people’s representatives that had limited marriage to one man and one woman.

We have included for you a number of insightful posts addressing this issue below, but let me offer 4 brief thoughts of my own by way of introduction.

1. As one of the articles below says, we as believers must get used to being a “missional minority” rather than a “Christian majority” in our culture. 

This is not altogether a bad thing—the church does best in environments like these. The end result of our culture’s departure from Christianity will probably not be less actual Christians (i.e. true disciples of Jesus), but simply the elimination of more cultural Christians. What is sad is that when any people depart from God’s righteousness, their society deteriorates. As Proverbs says, “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.” God uses his church as salt and light in their community (Matt 5:13–16), praying for the peace (shalom) of our city (Jer 29:7), and pleading with the civil magistrates to preserve our freedom to be disciples of Jesus in our culture (1 Tim 2:1–4).   Continue at J. D. Greear

IMAGE

When Two So-Called “Married” Women (or Men) Repent

One of the sweet advantages of insisting that there is no such thing as same-sex “marriage” is that there is therefore also no such thing as same-sex “divorce.” In the days ahead, this will be very good news for many who repent.

In the years to come, God will be merciful on thousands of those who have been damaged by the present moral madness of our culture. He will exalt Christ in the conversion of many who have lived in same-sex relationships. More complexities than we can imagine will be presented to us in the church.

One of the more difficult scenarios will be what the church should do when, say, two women, who have lived in a so-called married state for some years, are converted to Christ, repent of their sin, and want to join the church. And what if they have children?

In this uncharted territory, here is a map with some of the biblical guideposts I foresee. It is not exhaustive. I invite every pastor to pray that God would grant him the great privilege of leading new believers through this process.

1. Rejoice. We should join all heaven in the joy that our Father and the angels feel over this repentance.

“There will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.” (Luke 15:7)

2. Pray. This is going to be complex and difficult. We need humble wisdom beyond the merely human.

The wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere. (James 3:17)    Continue at John Piper

Homosexual Activist Agenda: Destroy Marriage

A friend recently pointed me to a radio show on which LGBT rights activist and journalist Masha Gessen was a guest. Gessen, herself a lesbian,  made some interesting admissions about the homosexual agenda. While some may deny that such an agenda exists, she was very clear that those pushing for same-sex marriage lie when they don’t admit that such a marriage would change the institution of marriage. (Thanks to the Illinois Family Institute for the transcript.)

“It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.

The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out thirty years ago.   Continue at Here I Blog

Same-Sex Marriage as a Civil Right — Are Wrongs Rights?

We should have seen it coming. Back in 1989 two young activists pushing for the normalization of homosexuality coauthored a book intended to serve as a political strategy manual and public relations guide for their movement. In After the Ball: How America Will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, authors Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen argued that efforts to normalize homosexuality and homosexual relationships would fail unless their movement shifted its argument to a demand for civil rights, rather than for moral acceptance. Kirk and Madsen argued that homosexual activists and their allies should avoid talking about sex and sexuality. Instead, “the imagery of sex per se should be downplayed, and the issue of gay rights reduced, as far as possible, to an abstract social question.”

 

Beyond Kirk and Madsen and their public relations strategy, an even more effective legal strategy was developed along the same lines. Legal theorists and litigators began to argue that homosexuals were a class of citizens denied basic civil liberties, and that the courts should declare them to be a protected class, using civil rights precedents to force a moral and legal revolution.   Continue at Al Mohler

Infanticide: The Coming Battle

Yesterday I created a file on my computer marked “Infanticide.” I intend to start making notes, collecting articles, and finding materials about the subject. I’ve been thinking about doing it for a while and I’m convinced that now is the time to start gathering info and getting ready to deal with the subject. Let me tell you why.  

I’m no chess grand master. I’ve read a few chess books; I know a few opening moves, some risky gambits; I know enough to hold my own. One thing I’ve learned about chess is that you have to think ahead, usually, at least two moves ahead. As a Christian in an increasingly aggressive secular culture, I believe, much like a game of chess, that we have to start thinking two moves ahead of the game. We have to identify what’s on, what’s next, and what is after that.

In terms of “what’s on”, that is obviously the same sex marriage (SSM) debate. Now I am opposed to SSM for various reasons, most of which will not convince most people! At the end of the day, SSM is about the attempt to compel government and society to affirm a person’s emotional attachments and choice of lifestyle entirely apart from any kind of sexual ecology. I think I have a solution to that debate which would get religion out of civil unions and government out of marriage – but that’s a different story. In any case, it’s time to face up. While there are some remarkably resistant hold outs – including Australia much to my surprise – the game is pretty much over. I’m convinced that SSM is inevitable. Nearly every non-Christian under 30 that I know is in favor of it. Even rugged beer swilling rugby stars are coming out in support of it. The writing is on the wall. While there might be a few pockets that hold out for longer, the barbarians will breach the gates sooner rather than later.   Continue at Mike Bird

IMAGE

eHarmony Compromises on Same Sex “Marriage”

Many of you have probably heard of the online dating site eHarmony. The cofounder, Neil Clark Warren, describes himself as a “passionate follower of Jesus,” and eHarmony initially only provided its services to heterosexual people. After a legal battle, eHarmony included homosexuals, first in a separate site and later in its main site.

In a recent interview, Warren said that his company has been damaged by the same-sex marriage debate. What does Warren mean by this? Well, according to the Christian Post, he said “that he hopes America can ‘be more harmonious’ on the issue.”

Now, Warren’s view on same-sex marriage is just not biblical.  He states, “I think this issue of same-sex marriage within the next five to 15 years will be no issue anymore. We’ve made too much of it. I’m tired of it. It has really damaged our company.” Anyone who knows their Bible and what God’s Word teaches about marriage (e.g.,  Matthew 19) understands that what Warren is saying here isn’t biblical—we can never “make too much” of standing up for the truth of God’s Word and standing against sinful behavior.  The same-sex marriage debate has hurt the business of a professing Christian, but God tells us in His Word that we will face persecution for Christ’s sake (Matthew 10:22; 2 Timothy 3:12). And you know, standing up for the Bible’s definition of marriage and its restrictions on sexuality will bring just such persecution from the world.   Continue at Ken Ham

IMAGE

Will Gay Rights Infringe on Religious Liberty?

CNN) -- It was inevitable that the debate over same-sex marriage would have a strong religious component. This is partly because it involves such questions as the interpretation of biblical passages that, on their face, condemn homosexuality as a sin. But it also involves squaring the authority of ancient texts with modern theological understanding and developments in biology. And of course, the importance of love and human autonomy as religious values should be considered.

 

Those issues surfaced in the various briefs filed in the Supreme Court, some of which are written as if the court must inevitably choose one religious point of view as the winner and the other as the loser. This is a false choice. The Court can make all winners, or at least avoid allowing one side to suppress the other's deepest beliefs.

The U.S. Supreme Court has not been asked -- nor could it possibly answer -- the question of what God or the Bible thinks about same-sex marriage. Religious groups are divided on that question, some supporting and others opposing same-sex marriage. And even if the religious viewpoint were clear, it should play no direct role in deciding whether the Constitution requires the states or the federal government to recognize same-sex marriage. Our government should not act to further one or another religious view of contested moral issues.    Continue at Marc D. Stern

How Denominations Come to Tolerate, Accept, and then Endorse Homosexuality

Tom Oden, writing in his book Requiem way back in 1995, explains how it happens.

The first step is always a study committee.

In response to claims for moral legitimization of behaviors widely thought displeasing to God, each of the mainline denominations has dutifully appointed elaborate study commissions to report back to the general legislative body on how the church might respond to this form of sexual orientation, practice, and advocacy. (152)

If the first study committee comes back with a traditional reading of the text, or if the legislative body dismisses the committee’s progressive interpretation, you can always assign another study committee amidst outcries that the recalcitrant conservatives suffer from “homophobia and reactionary stupidity” (153).

And if the traditional view cannot be overturned right away, try dismissing the whole controversy by telling people (with no small amount of chronological snobbery) that saner Christians understand this is nothing worth fighting over.

The fact that homosexual practice is not a weighty moral matter was asserted by the United Methodist Sexuality Report as a “consensus among Christian ethicists,” yet without any evidence to support this curious assertion. All the conspicuous Christian teachers who have resisted same-sex intercourse (John Chrysostom, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other consensual ecumenical teachers) are weighed in the debate less heavily than selected modern proponents of moral relativism and utilitarian permissivism. (153)    Continue at Kevin DeYoung

Should a Christian Photographer Work at a Same-Sex Wedding Ceremony?

Dear Dr. Moore,

I am an evangelical Christian, and I work as a wedding photographer. By conscience, I hold to an orthodox view of human sexuality, with all that entails. I’ve been asked to photograph a same-sex wedding service (legal in my state), and I’ve said no. I wonder if I did the right thing.

After all, this is a business, providing a service. Would it be right for me to refuse to serve a gay couple if I owned a restaurant? I don’t think so.  If a same-sex marriage isn’t a marriage at all (as the historic Christian view teaches), then how is this different from just photographing people at a birthday party or community festival (in which case it wouldn’t matter what’s happening with them sexually).

Moreover, I’m not sure that photographing an event is an endorsement of that event. I have photographed weddings of people who were divorced (and I didn’t investigate the background), people who were probably cohabiting, people who were most likely unequally yoked to one another, and so on.

So I’m kind of caught. My conscience bothers me because I turned this couple down, and my conscience will bother me if I photograph this wedding. What do you think?

The Wedding Photographer

Dear WP,   See Russell D. Moore's answer HERE

Same-Sex Marriage Ten Years On: Lessons from Canada

The effects of same-sex civil marriage in Canada—restrictions on free speech rights, parental rights in education, and autonomy rights of religious institutions, along with a weakening of the marriage culture—provide lessons for the United States.

Would recognizing same-sex relationships as marriages be much of a game-changer? What impact, if any, would it have on the public conception of marriage or the state of a nation’s marriage culture?

There has been no shortage of speculation on these questions. But the limited American experience with same-sex marriage to date gives us few concrete answers. So it makes sense to consider the Canadian experience since the first Canadian court established same-sex marriage a decade ago. There are, of course, important cultural and institutional differences between the US and Canada and, as is the case in any polity, much depends upon the actions of local political and cultural actors. That is to say, it is not necessarily safe to assume that Canadian experiences will be replicated here. But they should be considered; the Canadian experience is the best available evidence of the short-term impact of same-sex marriage in a democratic society very much like America.

Anyone interested in assessing the impact of same-sex marriage on public life should investigate the outcomes in three spheres: first, human rights (including impacts on freedom of speech, parental rights in public education, and the autonomy of religious institutions); second, further developments in what sorts of relationships political society will be willing to recognize as a marriage (e.g., polygamy); and third, the social practice of marriage.    Continue at Bradley Miller

Family Matters (John MacArthur)

For the last several years, we’ve had a front-row seat to a vicious, violent attack on one of the Lord’s most precious institutions. And make no mistake about it—the family, as established by the Lord, is under attack.

The assault is waged on many fronts—homosexual marriage, pervasive immorality, rampant divorce, and even the widespread acceptance of unwed couples and children born outside of marriage. They all chip away at God’s design for the family. The Lord created marriage as an image of His love and care for His people—our sinful society has turned it into a canvas for wickedness and perversion.

When he was recently in studio, we asked John MacArthur what’s most important about God’s design for the family, and what dangers face a society that rejects it. Here’s what he said:

Not long ago, we featured a blog series about the importance of biblical marriage and God’s design for the family. You can find all those posts collected on our series page.

And you can find further teaching on the subject in John MacArthur’s landmark series, The Fulfilled Family.

GTY Staff

McLaren Presides over Same-Sex Commitment Ceremony

Brian McLaren caused quite a stir in 2010 when he announced in his book A New Kind of Christianity that he no longer believes that homosexuality is a sin. Many people were surprised by the news simply because he himself had called on evangelicals in 2006 to observe a five year moratorium on making moral pronouncements about homosexuality (see here). Yet in the book, McLaren not only made a moral pronouncement, he also chastised conservative evangelicals for their views on the matter.

At the time, it appeared that McLaren’s revisionist views were merely a part of his emerging theological outlook—a postmodern slouch toward theological liberalism. No doubt it was that, as his writings make perfectly clear. But could there have been more to it than that?

The New York Times reports that McLaren recently presided over his own son’s same-sex commitment ceremony. This would seem to imply that from the time McLaren called a “moratorium” to the time that he wrote A New Kind of Christianity, McLaren was dealing with the issue not merely as a detached observer but as one with a deeply personal stake in the matter. I don’t pretend to account for all of the influences over McLaren’s thinking, but it’s hard to imagine that his son’s situation would not have had some sort of an impact on McLaren’s theological revisions.   Continue at Denny Burk

The Marriage Debates: Sometimes, the Slope Really Is Slippery!

There is no doubt that the slippery slope argument is abused and has earned its position as a logical fallacy. Politicians use the argument to create fear and loathing against the policies they oppose. “If we allow this, the whole world will fall apart.” Because the argument is often abused, it tends to be discounted whenever it is used. “That is just a slippery slope argument.” It must be invalid. 

But, folks, sometimes the slope really is slippery. Sometimes, a relatively small step can lead us over the edge and send us sliding down a dangerous slope.

I have lived in Iowa for 31 of my 55 years. I know a little bit about snow and snow sledding. When the kids were young, we loved snow days. We’d pile everyone into the van along with our sleds and we’d head to Boyson Elementary or Jones Park and ride some slippery slopes. You are poised at the top of the hill in your sled and you push yourself or scoot along an inch or two at a time until suddenly you reach the tipping point. You start to slide on your own and pick up speed. There is nothing to stop you until you reach the bottom of the hill. It’s a slippery slope.

A day or two ago, I read one of the most disgusting and disturbing statements I have heard, coming from Hollywood director Nick Cassevetes. He directed CB Scott’s favorite movie, “The Notebook.” He is releasing a new movie called Yellow, that evidently explores a theme, incest, that even our perverted, morally sick world has considered taboo. In an interview with “The Wrap” Cassevetes made this statement.

(There is a swear word in the quote. I normally delete those, but I thought it best to leave this one in. I hope the use of that word does not offend, but it demonstrates the utter contempt for moral standards in Cassevetes’ statement and I left it in for that reason. And, frankly, if the four letter word is what offends you about this statement, you might be missing the point!)   Continue at Dave Miller

Gay Pride?

Homosexuality is not a topic I enjoy talking (or writing) about, but given its recent rise in the news cycle (thanks to the controversy over same-sex marriage) it’s a topic that I, as a Christian, feel compelled to discuss for several reasons. One, to combat the continued misrepresentations from supporters of the homosexual agenda on the Christian position on homosexuality. Two, to continue to reason these things out in the public square so that the nature of the debate will progress. Three, to help fellow Christians who either are misinformed on this issue or haven’t studied this issue enough to form a cogent response when the opportunity presents itself. In other words, I talk about this issue because it is continually brought to our attention by homosexual activists and the media; therefore, a response is called for. I am fully aware that most people do not share my view on this issue because I know that most people do not have a Biblical worldview. All I ask is that if you disagree with what I am about to say that you fairly represent what I am going to say and attack the argument, not the person.

Over this past weekend, Chicago held it’s annual Gay Pride parade, a parade to celebrate and promote acceptance for homosexuals and their lifestyle. I find it interesting that the word “pride” is used. The concept is obvious; homosexuals should take pride in who they are and how they live. Pride is, of course, the opposite of shame or stigma, so acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle and of homosexuals first comes when they accept themselves as normal, functioning members of the society. Then they can advocate for acceptance from the general populace.   Continue at NewCreationPerson