There is no evidence that sexual orientation is biologically determined.  In fact, there is evidence that disproves it. They are called twins.  Since identical twins experience the same hormone bath in the womb and the same DNA, when one twin is gay, both should be gay 100% of the time.  But both are gay less than 15% of the time (11% for men; 14% for women). In fact, non-identical twins are twice as likely to both be gay as identical twins, which can only be explained by environmental factors, not DNA.  At best, sexual orientation may be biologically influenced.  But clearly, the major cause of same-sex attraction is social in nature.  It is nurture, not nature that is the primary cause of sexual orientation.  And sexual orientation is not something that is fixed and unchanging, but changes over time.

And now, there is a report released showing that 49% of young people in the United Kingdom say they are not 100% heterosexual, but experience degrees of same-sex attraction.  And what’s really interesting is seeing how this compares across other age categories: (more…)

This has been making its rounds in the media. This pastor, and all those clapping at this immorality will have to give an answer to God one day for their actions. It is shameful to celebrate as beautiful something God considers to be abominable, and to do so in the name of Christ. I sympathize with those who experience same-sex attraction, but the church ought to be there to help them resist their temptations, not to applaud them for giving in to them.

We find out that Catwoman is bisexual, the Green Lantern, Loki, Iceman, and many more are gay.  Now, Wonder Woman is officiating a same-sex wedding.  It seems that DC Comics and Marvel are bending over backward to push homosexuality. And who are they pushing homosexuality to?  Your children.  Parents, it’s time to parent.

55d3b08b1d00006e001452df

LifeWay Research conducted a survey of 1000 American adults and 1000 Protestant pastors to get their take on what is considered a justifiable divorce and what is not.  Only 38% of Americans think it is a sin to get a divorce on the grounds that a couple no longer loves one another.  It’s no wonder we have so much divorce.

Ironically, the percentage of American people who see divorce as being wrong is consistent, despite the reason.  For example, 39% think it is sin to divorce one’s spouse for adultery, and 37% think it’s a sin to divorce one’s spouse due to physical abuse.  Protestant pastors, on the other hand, were much more discriminate.  Here is a chart detailing the responses:

divorce-is-a-sin-when-1024x950

Katy FaustBack in February, Katy Faust penned an open letter to Justice Kennedy (whom everyone recognized would be the swing vote on the same-sex marriage case the U.S. Supreme Court decided recently), arguing that he should not make legal provision for same-sex marriage in the U.S.  What makes Katy’s letter so interesting and pertinent to the debate is the fact that her mother is a lesbian and she was raised in a same-sex household.  This gives her an interesting and important perspective on this debate.

Katy points out that the reason government involves itself in the institution of marriage is for the sake of children.  The welfare of children is the only reason for the government to be involved in anyone’s romantic relationships.  She further argues that children have the right to their natural parents and the influence of both genders: “Each child is conceived by a mother and a father to whom that child has a natural right. When a child is placed in a same-sex-headed household, she will miss out on at least one critical parental relationship and a vital dual-gender influence.”  Same-sex marriage is an injustice because it intentionally robs a child of their fundamental right to both of their parents.

(more…)

Political correctness has progressed from silliness, to annoying, to downright stupidity. From CTPost.com:

Under pressure from the NAACP, the [Connecticut] state Democratic Party will scrub the names of the two presidents from its annual fundraising dinner because of their ties to slavery.

Party leaders voted unanimously Wednesday night in Hartford to rename the Jefferson Jackson Bailey dinner in the aftermath of last month’s fatal shooting of nine worshipers at a historic black church in Charleston, S.C.

Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson were wrong to think they could own black people. We see that clearly now, but these men were men of their generation. We honor them, not because of their actions in regards to slavery, but for their many other accomplishments in the founding of this nation. To remove their namesake because they did not think and act like people in the 21st century is absurd.  What’s next?  Should we throw away the Declaration of Independence since Jefferson the slaveholder wrote that too?

In the future, when America comes to see that abortion is a moral tragedy, and the practice is outlawed, will we remove the names of Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton from everything their names are attached to as well?  Will we fail to honor them for whatever good they were honored for, just because they could not see as clearly as future generations will see?  No.  We honor the people of the past for the good they did, not for their flaws.  To remove their names from monuments or anything else due to their flaws is wrongheaded and petty.

This past week has brought to the public’s attention the discovery of two important manuscripts: one of Leviticus and one of the Qur’an.

Leviticus

The Leviticus manuscript was actually discovered in 1970 in a Torah ark from a Byzantine-era synagogue excavated at Ein Gedi in Israel. It was burnt by a fire, however, and could not be deciphered until now. The scroll was found to contain Leviticus 1:1-8. It is dated no later than the 6th century A.D. (when the synagogue and village were burned).

Burnt Leviticus scroll 1

Burnt Leviticus scroll 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Qur’an

Two pages of the Qur’an (portions of Surahs 18-20) were discovered inside the codex of another late 7th century Qur’anic manuscript at Birmingham University.  Radiocarbon dating of the manuscript has revealed an age of A.D 568A- 645.  Muhammad lived from A.D. 570 – 632, making it a live possibility that the manuscript fragment was composed while Muhammad was still alive.

(more…)

Angela MerkelA story broke on July 15 that I’ve been meaning to write about. During an interview[1] with Florian Mundt, German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, made it clear that she does not want Germany to follow the American example of making legal provision for same-sex marriage.  Merkel said she supports civil unions with benefits equal to marriage, but she “make[s] a different at some point.” For her, that point is the definition of marriage: “For me, personally, marriage is a man and a woman living together.”

While I disagree with Merkel that same-sex couples should receive the same benefits as married couples, her position is actually quite sensible.  Essentially she is saying “Same-sex couples should be treated as equal to married couples in every way, but they have no right to have their relationship called a ‘marriage’ because a marriage is, by nature, a male-female union.”  She is drawing on the intuition that “marriage” has an essence – that marriage is fundamentally a male-female union, and thus it is impossible for a same-sex union to be a marriage. This position is quite rational since it is based on objective observations about human nature and biological function.

(more…)

PolygamyConservatives have long argued that the legalization of same-sex marriage will likely lead to the eventual legalization of polygamy because the same principles used to argue for same-sex marriage apply equally to polygamy. Liberals tended to say this was nonsense.  Now that same-sex marriage is the law of the land, however, they are beginning to talk more openly about the legalization of polygamy.

In the New York Times, William Baude asks this very question: (more…)

I thought it was only Europe and America that had fallen victim to thinking people have a right to not have their feelings hurt. Now, it appears that Russia is falling into the same stupidity. They have blocked an atheist website because the content is offensive to Christians.  Waah waah. Cry to mommy and then suck it up. There is no right not to be offended. Get a grip and man up!

BoyScoutOnly the blind could have failed to see this coming. The executive committee of the Boy Scouts of America has unanimously approved a new policy that allows practicing homosexuals to be scout leaders.  Not long ago they lifted their ban on openly homosexual scouts.  It was just a matter of time before consistency caught up with them.

It is disheartening to see how the Boy Scouts has capitulated to public opinion rather than holding true to their ideals and mission. Being a Boy Scout requires that one be “morally straight.” This change is a clear signal that the Boy Scouts now considers homosexuality to be morally good.  This is moral confusion from an organization that is built on a strong foundation of moral integrity.

The Boy Scouts is supposed to be an organization that teaches young men how to lead, and yet the leaders of the Boy Scouts have failed to model that.  Strong leaders stay true to their convictions; they do not capitulate to public pressure when their convictions become unpopular.  What a shame!

Here is a great video summarizing the homily to the Hebrews.

RachelDolezalI’m sure you’ve all heard of Rachel Dolezal, the NAACP president of Spokane Washington. She has recently been outed as a white woman. Her bloodline is Czech, German, and Swedish, not African. Yet, she has been posing as a black woman for several years now. According to her interview on the Today show, she has identified as a black woman since she was five years old.

What I would like to know is why those who side with the transgender are up in arms over Rachel Dolezal. She is simply transracial. Her true self is a black woman, but she is trapped in a white woman’s body. It is not her fault that she was born in the wrong body. Remember, the mind trumps the body. It doesn’t matter that her body is as white as they come. What matters is how she perceives herself. Since she perceives herself as black, she is black, and she ought to be able to undergo skin darkening treatments to align her body with her true identity.

Those who think transgenderism is normal, and the proper treatment is gender reassignment surgery, please tell me why you think that Rachel Dolezal is not black.  After all, race is not as fixed as sex.  There are only two sexes, but there are many races, and race is not as clearly defined as sex.  New races can be created by consistently mixing two people of different races.  The same cannot be said of sex.  Indeed, what is the racial identity of mixed race children?  If a Mexican woman has a child with an African man, is the child Mexican or African?  Something else?  Race and racial identity is rather fluid.  So if anything, we ought to be more supportive of the transracial than the transgender.

I know this is old news (May 24), but I am behind on my news and I am simply posting this for documentation purposes.

Ireland had a popular vote to determine whether the country would allow same-sex marriage. A full 62% of the country voted to approve the measure. They are the 20th country to create same-sex marriage, but the first country to do so by popular vote rather than the courts or the legislature.

TransgenderOddly enough, I don’t have much to say about Bruce Jenner.  Others have provided excellent commentary and I don’t feel the need to add to the mix.  What I will say is that my heart goes out to the man.  I cannot imagine what it is like to feel like you are a woman trapped in a man’s body.  While I think his decision to alter his body to make it look like a female’s body is a tragic one, I understand why he would do so.  He is trying to look like what he thinks he truly is, and he thinks that these alterations will make him happy.  Unfortunately, I think he’ll find out too late that it won’t bring him the happiness he thought it would, and he may even come to regret the decision.  While we should be firm in our convictions and position that his actions are wrong, we should never do so at the expense of his humanity.  He is a person.  A confused person.  A lost person.  A person who needs love, and not just words of moral condemnation.  This is a time that we need to proclaim the truth, but proclaim it with compassion and love.

What I would like to focus my attention on is why our culture is divided on the issue of transgenderism and gender-reassignment, and then show how the logic of the liberal view is applied inconsistently. (more…)

We rightfully bemoan the rise of the gay hermeneutic in which Christians are reinterpreting the Bible to allow for committed same-sex relationships, but has anyone ever stopped to think that what these liberals are doing to the homosex texts we “conservatives” have already done to the divorce and remarriage texts?  We have mangled Jesus and Paul’s teachings to allow for divorce for reasons other than sexual immorality, and to allow those who have divorced or have been divorced without grounds to remarry because we don’t think it is fair for people to be unhappy or alone.  We understand the strong desire to be in a loving, sexual relationship.  Our emotions become the motivating factor for reinterpreting (or ignoring) what would otherwise seem to be a pretty straightforward condemnations for most divorces and remarriages.

(more…)

“Heresy” is a word that gets thrown around rather loosely these days.  We will cavalierly declare someone a heretic because their views on eschatology differ from our own.  It’s famously been said that “heresy is what you believe, while orthodoxy is what I believe.”  But heresy is not the same as error.  Not all theological errors or false doctrines rise to the level of heresy.  A heresy is a belief held by a confessing Christian that is sufficient to damn their soul.  To charge someone with heresy is not merely to say that their theology is wrong, but that it is so wrong that they do not qualify as a Christian and are not saved.

(more…)

Lifestyle Evangelism3Jesus charged his apostles – and by extension, his church – with the great commission.  The mission he gave us involves both the proclaiming of the gospel as well as the discipling of those who put their trust in Jesus.

If we are honest with ourselves, the American church is not great at either proclaiming or discipling, but we are doing worse on the proclaiming end, and it’s only getting worse.  As our culture becomes increasing secular and as Christians increasingly buy into the notion that our faith is to be kept private, we are becoming increasingly reluctant to proclaim Jesus.  There are a host of reasons for this, but I am not concerned to analyze them at this point.  Instead, I want to focus on the type of evangelism we are opting for in its place.  Some have called it “lifestyle evangelism.”  Lifestyle evangelism entails the notion that the way we live our life is the best witness of Jesus.  Our lives are a living gospel.  This form of evangelism is summed up in the apocryphal quote attributed to Francis Assisi: “Preach the gospel. If necessary, use words.”

(more…)

Nick Punch

The mythical being we call Santa Claus or “St. Nick” is loosely based on a real historical figure, Saint Nicholas of Myra.  St. Nicholas served as the bishop of Myra in the early fourth century.  While he is known as a giving man, most do not realize that he gave people more than money.

The story goes* that he was one of the bishops present at the Council of Nicea in A.D. 325, and was a defender of the full deity of Christ against Arius.  When Arius took the floor and began to argue for his view of Jesus (a view that claimed Jesus was a created divine being who was less than fully God), Saint Nicholas’ heresy meter went off…as well as his temper.  He entered the “ring” and proceeded to slap Arius in the face for speaking such heresies.

So next the next time you think of Santa Claus, don’t think of the jolly ‘ol fat man in the red suit; think of the fist-fighting defender of orthodoxy! Take that…and that…and that you heretics!

BTW, legend has it that when Nick slapped Arius, Arius yelled out “Ho ho homoousios.”  If you didn’t get that, don’t worry. Just a stupid theology joke.

*I have to admit that there are not good historical grounds for the story. St. Nick is not mentioned as being present in the contemporary historical sources, and the story about him punching Arius does not appear in any literature until the late 14th century.  Furthermore, Arius wasn’t even allowed to speak at the council since he was not a bishop (Eusebius of Nicomedia defended Arius’ position for him at the council), so he couldn’t have slapped Arius. Despite the questionable historical veracity of the account, it’s just too fun to pass up.

There was an interesting exchange between Justice Alito and Mary L. Bonauto, one of the lawyers arguing on behalf of same-sex marriage before SCOTUS. Alito asks Bonauto how polygamous unions could be denied the right of marriage in the future if SCOTUS ruled in Bonauto’s favor given that the rationale offered for legalizing same-sex marriage seems to apply to polygamous unions as well. Bonauto’s response was…well…interesting.  After shooting herself in the foot, the best she could come up with was a statement of faith that it wouldn’t happen due to some practical and legal concerns. Not very persuasive. The fact of the matter is that once you dispense with the opposite-sex prerequisite for marriage, the idea of “two and only two” no longer makes sense. The rational basis for limiting a marriage to two people is that there are two sexes, and the sexual completeness of one man and one woman.  As Robert Gagnon has written: (more…)