(Important: Please read my comment on this article in light of the terrorist attack in Orlando.)
On Friday, June 24, President Obama designated a new national monument at the site of the Stonewall uprising in New York City “to honor the broad movement for LGBT equality”. This was just the latest in a series of speeches and actions on the part of his administration to define down–if not obliterate–any notions of sexual deviance. Worse, to now even memorialize and celebrate it.
Friday’s pronouncement came laden with historical revisionism and stolen valor.
I would encourage the reader to take a few minutes to watch the “your-tax-dollars-in-action” White House video commemorating the uprising. The video was released and promoted through the internet on the 24th and was broadcast on the billboards in Times Square on the eve of the NYC Pride Parade
And now watch, as they say, the “rest of the story“– the true story.
June 24th is not the first time Obama has melded the normalization and celebration of homosexual couplings into the noble movements for women’s suffrage and civil rights for blacks and other ethnic minorities. I’ve lost track of the number of times he’s trotted out the alliterative triad, “From Seneca Falls, to Selma to Stonewall.” Nor is it the first time he has cherry-picked, embellished and even rewritten history in order to push his progressive agenda.
Another example bears examining.
When Obama spoke at the site of a true historic landmark–the Edmund Pettis Bridge in Selma, Alabama–on the 50th anniversary of the pivotal civil rights march, he rightly observed the suffering the praying, non-violent demonstrators endured at the hands of the police.
“We gather here to celebrate them. We gather here to honor the courage of ordinary Americans willing to endure billy clubs and the chastening rod; tear gas and the trampling hoof; men and women who despite the gush of blood and splintered bone would stay true to their North Star and keep marching towards justice. They did as Scripture instructed: “Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer.” ”
But towards the end of the speech, Obama had the audacity to smuggle the so-called right for one man to have sex with another into the same ring of honor, integrity and sacrifice.
“We’re the firefighters who rushed into those buildings on 9/11, the volunteers who signed up to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq. We’re the gay Americans whose blood ran in the streets of San Francisco and New York, just as blood ran down this bridge.”
This blather, this twisted nugget of unhistorical agitprop, is stunning. And so is the complete pass the comment received from the mainstream press.
When did anyone marching for the right to engage in homosex or use an opposite-sex bathroom get set upon by anyone, much less the police? I’ve covered a number of gay rights parades and protests and all I’ve ever seen are police protecting the demonstrators, sometimes looking the other way while marchers dress and cavort in a manner that would get anyone doing the same things in a different context arrested.
When was any blood shed during these marches, unless it was spilled by the S&M contingency that is invariably present at these parades in major cities? And when exactly did the blood run in the streets of San Francisco and New York like it did during the Selma march?
And how much praying, preaching and seeking to obey the words of Scripture attends these celebrations of hedonism and a “do what thou wilt” sexuality?
And what do you think, the firefighters of 9/11? Soldiers who have risked their lives in Afghanistan? How do you feel about having your sacrifices compared to a phalanx of proverts marching through city streets, throwing condoms and packets of lube out to cheering throngs?
And my black brothers and sisters, how do you feel about having your immutable, genetically determined and morally neutral “race”[ii]—who you are, in other words–conflated with the mutable[iii], genetically non-determinative as well as immoral[iv]actions of others: in other words, what they do[v]?
We’re well on our way to the day when God may set up His own monument in America. It will likely be a grave stone planted in the heart of our nation’s capital. And on it I can imagine His own triad: “Ichabod, Psalm 2:1-6, and Romans 1:18ff.
Not as slick and alliterative as Obama’s. But infinitely more true.
Wake up America.
[ii] Bugs me to use the term because there really is only one race–the human one. But you get what I mean
[iii] There isn’t time to develop this here. Suffice it to say, now that they have won the day and the pressure is off to promote the lie that people are born 100% gay, can’t change and can’t have a loving, meaningful and sexually satisfying heterosexual relationship, even staunch LGBTQ activists are more and more acknowledging that sexual attraction is “fluid”–subject to change.
[iv] This would be according to the vast majority of people and religions throughout human history.
[v] Some will disagree with my nomenclature. But through the lens of a Biblical worldview, a person sexually attracted to members of their own gender is not guilty/has not sinned–is in this sense not a homosexual–until they commit a homosexual act.
While not yet conclusive, evidence appears to be mounting that Omar Mateen, the Islamist terrorist responsible for the horrible tragedy in Orlando that left 49 dead and 53 injured, may have been motivated, at least in part, by homophobic tendencies.
While true homophobia is far rarer than commonly reported, studies suggest that some individuals who dislike and even hate homosexuality as a sexual inclination and at times homosexuals as people can be motivated by a genuine fear (phobia) of same-sex attraction, often due to their own suppressed homosexual tendencies.
Presently there are at least seven indications that Mateen may fall into this category:
- A member of his 2006 police academy class claims that Mateen asked him out romantically. “We went to a few gay bars with him, and I was not out at the time, so I declined his offer,” the former classmate said. He has asked that his name not be used.
- The Los Angeles Times has reported that the shooter attended the Pulse nightclub possibly as many as a dozen times before the rampage. Reconnaissance for a planned act of terror? Perhaps. But Mateen’s reported instability coupled with the manner in which he executed the murders suggests that his act of terror was not that well-thought out and pre-planned. It is more likely that he went to the Pulse—and reportedly other gay clubs as well—for libidinous reasons.
- Kevin West, a regular at Pulse, said Mateen messaged him on and off for a year before the shooting using the gay chat and dating app Jack’d. (Like Grindr and other similar “gay-dating” apps, Jack’d uses social media and GPS satellite tracking to help individuals who often don’t know each other to quickly and conveniently “hook-up.” This can mean everything from a coffee and conversation to having sex. The pictures and descriptions users put in their profile would suggest the latter is the primary purpose.)
- Mateen was also described as socially awkward, a common characteristic of people who are conflicted about their sexual identity.
- His former wife has testified that he beat her. While she attributes his violent behavior to an undiagnosed bi-polar disorder, it is not uncommon for a man with same-sex tendencies and who perceives himself as stuck in an unsatisfying heterosexual relationship to then take the resultant frustration out on his opposite-sex partner via emotional, verbal and even physical abuse.
- Daniel Gilroy, a former co-worker at the security firm where the shooter was employed, called Mateen “unhinged and unstable,” a man who frequently made anti-gay and racist comments. Gilroy repeatedly complained to management about him, but they did nothing “because he was Muslim.” Gilroy quit after Mateen began stalking him via multiple text messages—20 to 30 a day. All of this fits the profile of a man who is deeply conflicted and possibly self-loathing because of his own unwanted homosexual impulses.
- Seddique Mateen, the shooter’s Islamic-fundamentalist father, recounted an incident that took place in Miami where Omar saw two men kissing in public and later in a bathroom and became “very angry.” Seddique attributed the reaction to a natural revulsion at an act that is viewed as morally wrong through the lens of their Islamic beliefs. But the intensity of his son’s response would be in keeping with a man who is over-compensating before a judgmental father as well as one troubled by self-doubt or loathing concerning his own sexual identity.
There appears to be little doubt that Omar Mateen was motivated to kill, at least in part, by his radical Islamic beliefs. These beliefs encouraged him to wage a Jihadist campaign against the enemy, with a special blessing if he was to do so during the “holy” month of Ramadan. The enemy in the Islamist lexicon is the “infidel,” with America—the Great Satan—and Israel as its beating heart. The Pulse nightclub was hit because it was a soft target in America—an unprotected place where laughter and fun could be dramatically, radically transformed into tears and unspeakable sadness by a lone madman. Because Mateen was a reputed racist and his strike zone was catering to the Latin community that night, it is possible that his 102 casualties were also victims of ethnic bigotry. And because homosexual behavior is a capital offense under Sharia law (take note, progressives), there can be little doubt they were further targeted for being gay; that they were victims of homo-hatred.
But it now looks likely there may have been one more motivation behind this great tragedy—one that could have been primary. A big part of the shooter’s hatred may have been directed at a deep-seated fear and loathing within himself.
Omar Mateen could very well have been a homophobe.
 The vast majority of people who openly—or due to the politically-correct tenor of our times, privately—view homosexual behavior as sub-optimal or morally wrong are not homophobic. They have no fear—irrational or otherwise—of homosexuality. They may object to it for philosophical or empirical reasons. More commonly, among Christians it is seen as a brokenness in God’s design and plan for mankind (Gen. 1:27; 5:2), as one manifestation of the Fall: the effects of the sin every person must struggle with and find a way to overcome by God’s grace. Same-sex attracted or gender dysphoric individuals are not to be feared—and certainly not hated. In Christ, they are to be respected and loved as fellow image-bearers of God and invited to join the great company of broken people and fellow-sinners in their quest to be conformed more and more into that image. Like the woman caught in adultery (John 8:1-11) they are to be invited to experience His love, forgiveness and healing power—to be set free from the condemnation of sin and find the grace to “go and sin no more.”
In today’s brave new world, it’s verboten to connect child abuse to same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria, despite them being disproportionately common among its victims. Yet the media and public widely accept and discuss the connection between child abuse and later struggles with everything from obesity to attachment disorder. My blog on Sex and the Singularly Abused Girl evoked an immediate response from a number of people who acknowledged and appreciated this point.
Some, however, insisted there are many exceptions – homosexuals who have never been abused but have what appears to be an innate same-sex orientation. Several mentioned a family member or friend who truly seem to have been “born gay.” (As a pastor and and a student of the subject I have known, ministered to and interviewed quite a few as well.) They wanted to know what I had to say about them.
First, I would simply point to the many LGBTQ advocates who now freely acknowledge that hitching their cause to the civil rights movement was the key to normalizing homosexuality. This was chief among a number of reasons they insisted same-sex attraction was congenital and immutable – akin to being black or Slovak.
But now they have so spectacularly won the day, more and more homophiles have drop-kicked this rhetoric. And for good reason. There simply is no scientific support for the “hard-wired, born gay” premise. To the contrary, a growing body of evidence points to human sexuality being malleable or—as it is more commonly characterized—“fluid.” (And the right to engage with and explore this fluidity has now become the new cause célèbre for many in the movement.)
“…early childhood influences on sexuality (whatever they may be) were not immutable, and that most individuals were unaware of their own capacity for change in sexuality over time.” (Lisa M. Diamond, Sexual Fluidity, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008), p.8)
And toward the end of Sexual Fluidity, Diamond openly acknowledges that for the sake of the gay rights movement (as it was in 2008) and its “not yet ready for prime-time” end-game—that is unrestricted sexual freedom—it perhaps remained necessary to continue to propagate the “born gay” myth:
“Some (gay) activists feel that the climate is not yet right for such a shift in our thinking about sexual freedom. Given the recent resurgence of conservative antigay activism (much of it focused on banning same-sex marriage), it may well be that for now, the safest way to advocate for lesbian/gay/bisexual rights is to keep propagating a deterministic model: sexual minorities are born that way and can never be otherwise. If this is an easier route to acceptance (which may in fact be the case), is it really so bad that it is inaccurate? (pp. 256,257)
(For a more detailed, yet concise refutation of the born-gay myth, please refer to Dr. Michael Brown’s excellent article, No One is Born Gay. )
But while no one is deterministically born gay, what are we to make of the fact that there is evidence that some people are genetically and/or hormonally and/or dispositionally wired in such a way as to make them more vulnerable, more likely to be subject to homo-erotic temptations and inclinations?
Simple. Accept and deal with it.
But this in no way means we are to also accept the homophile agenda being smuggled in with this not-too-surprising reality.
The fact is each of us is hard and soft-wired in ways that predispose us to all manner of sub-optimal characteristics and habits. Every parent knows their children have certain traits and impulses that are just part of their make-up. After being called to school for the third-time that year because little Johnny is mentally checking out of class in favor of looking out the window and doodling, his mother nervously laughs: “He’s either going to grow up to be a great artist of some kind…or live in a van down by the river.”
Mary was born with a temper. Manuel is shy. Mark is predisposed towards (choose one): anger, pride, overeating, lust, fear, risk-taking, impulsivity, aggression, passivity, rebellion, alcohol or chemical addiction, gender or sexual confusion…on and on. And all of these predilections are, at least in part, the product of everything from their genes; birth-order; the hormones, nutrition or chemical compounds they bathed in while in utero; the emotional and spiritual climate of their home; life experiences (particularly during the critical years between birth and around eight-years-of-age) and many other factors over which the child has little or no control.
And let’s not forget the biggest glitch: a sin nature; the most universal birth defect of them all.
Does that mean we are to wave the white flag of surrender? Bow down before the idol of determinism, embrace our brokenness and iniquities—be they small or big—and join in singing the chorus from West Side Story: “Hey, I’m depraved on account of I’m deprived”?
Souls are doomed the moment that concession is made. And so is the culture that normalizes it.
The fact is, we’re all broken as a result of the Fall. We’re all predisposed towards sin. And each of us has our own demons to fight—one, two or more “besetting sins” or inclinations that will follow us, sometimes all the days of our life. And unless we’re in thrall to politically-correct group-think, each of us also knows we’re not to succumb to or be controlled by these temptations. Instead, we’re called to battle them and learn to channel their dark energies towards the light. Such is the stuff of which great souls—and a much better world—are made. (I would be remiss at this point if I didn’t say that knowing God and learning to ride the winds of His grace is the penultimate key to victory in this regard.)
Lastly, there is also the fact that the characteristics, some innate, that would make someone more vulnerable to homo-erotic inclinations can result in homosexual behavior via a kind-of “self-fulfilling prophecy” mechanism. Take, as a fairly common example, a boy who is wired to be more “aesthetic than athletic.” What happens if he’s marginalized in some way by his former jock dad, who prefers the other, future jock son—and as a result grows up hungry for male affirmation? Or if he is rejected by the other boys on the playground and called a sissy or a queer—and begins to think perhaps he is. I could go on listing hundreds of common scenarios that these types of boys experience and that can bend them towards homo-eroticism. Or worse, create a vulnerability towards a predatory homosexual who then proceeds to flip the switch though sexual abuse masquerading as male affirmation. Sadly, it happens every day.
And it is going to happen more and more now that the walls regarding sexual norms have been so thoroughly destroyed.
“I had been living and traveling in a world full of dykes…in our moments of honesty and courage, we exposed ourselves and our wounds to each other and found that a remarkable percentage of us had suffered at the hands of adult men in our lives and families.” Lesbian author, editor Laura Autoniou in her essay “Anti-Venom for the Soul” (PoMoSexuals: Challenging Assumptions About Gender and Sexuality [Cleis Press, 1997], p. 115)
Imagine a conspiracy within the tobacco industry to glamorize smoking while simultaneously suppressing any linkage between the use of cigarettes and lung cancer, emphysema, COPD and other chronic lung diseases. Vast sums of money are spent on advertising, attempting to make smoking appear fun, satisfying, progressive and chic—never dangerous or stupid. Campaign contributions ensure that an obfuscating cloud of tobacco “smoke” (along with mirrors) settles over the political process. Schools and studies are endowed; rabbits tested and chased; science spun and every exception to the harder-and-harder-to-ignore rules is trumpeted from the housetops.
And millions of people, directly or indirectly, suffer and die.
Obviously, there’s no need to imagine it. This very thing happened in America and lasted for decades…until the tragic costs of believing a lie and normalizing something that is contrary to human flourishing simply became impossible to ignore.
Despite man’s best efforts to do what feels good and right in his own eyes, truth in the end will triumph. Or to put it another way: we don’t just break the laws of nature and nature’s God. They break us.
It’s my deep belief and fear—shared by millions of others who worship and serve this God—that precisely the same thing is happening with the growing movement to cast-off scripture and multiplied centuries of Western (read: Christian) tradition and instead normalize homosexuality or more broadly (because this is truly the endgame) pomosexuality. We are once again suppressing facts, ignoring history, cherry-picking data points, embracing groupthink, and allowing ourselves to be seduced by mavens of spin and self-serving agendas.
The biggest difference between the two campaigns? The consequences of believing and embracing this lie will ultimately be far more profound and destructive than those tied to shilling cancer sticks. As the Apostle Paul made acutely clear in an epistle millions believe to be the most life and world-changing letter ever written: any culture that conflates the image of God as reflected in the fundamental binary structure of mankind (Gen. 1:27); then exchanges the natural function of these binary halves in relation to sexual activity (Rom.1:26,27); and finally embraces this exchange as normal and good (vs. 32b) is doomed. There remains only a terrifying expectation of judgment as God withdraws His hand and allows them to fully reap what they have sown.
A book can and should be written about the broad propaganda campaign that has been waged against the God-ordained structure for gender and human sexuality. It could well be unparalleled in human history, beggaring the treacherous accomplishments of the tobacco industry by comparison: how a barrage of lies, damn lies and spun statistics; quack science; spurious analogies; stolen valor; fear and intimidation tactics, manufactured martyrs and Orwellian newspeak have accomplished the near impossible; what most Americans would have found hard to even contemplate just ten tears ago: legalized homosexual marriage in all fifty states.
Let’s briefly focus on just one small sliver of the propaganda pie, touched on in the opening quote—written, we should note, by a lesbian and published in a radically pro-pomosexuality book: the epic public denial among pomosexualists of any causal connection between sexual abuse and the development of homo-erotic attraction among women. The following examples represent just the tip of the iceberg.
Mary Lambert, a self-identified lesbian who wrote and sings the hook in Macklemore’s wildly successful pro-homosexual anthem “Same Love,” recently admitted that she had been raped by her father, abused by her “mom’s partners” and gang-raped when she was 17.
Cher’s daughter, Chastity Bono—now Chaz after sex-reassignment surgery—wrote in her memoir The End of Innocence (2003) that when she was 11-years-old she was sexually seduced by “Joan,” a lesbian friend of her mother’s who later became Chastity’s sexual confidant. She went on to then describe another dynamic that is also common (though far from universal) with people who experience homosexual impulses: the lack of a close relationship with the same-gendered parent.
“My mom wasn’t always around, since she was working, so Joan sort of filled in that gap…I just focused on the fact that I wasn’t getting enough attention, and I often felt lonely or abandoned. When I spent time with Joan, I felt like the center of attention…” (pp. 10–11).
Rosie O’Donnell, who also had profound mother-issues, has powerfully spoken and written about being sexually abused by a 25-year-old man when she was ten and the varied and profound impacts it has had on her life. Curiously, being same-sex attracted is not one of them.
Comedian Margaret Cho, who self-identifies as bisexual and lives in an open relationship with her husband, has also acknowledged being molested and raped as a young girl. “I just happened to be physically smaller and that’s not my fault,” she said, “so I refuse to let that bad stuff hang around and mess me up. How much it has taken from me, I have no idea— I refuse to look at it, so it doesn’t exist.” This type of avoidance concerning the profound effects of abuse on sexual inclinations and behavior has become standard among self-identified homo-, bi- and trans-sexual people.
Sapphire is the author of the 1996 novel Push that was made into the Oscar-winning movie, Precious. The book and movie tells the story of story of Claireece “Precious” Jones, an illiterate, obese, 16-year-old girl pregnant with a second child by her own father and who now self-identifies (cue Hollywood applause track) as a lesbian. Sapphire, who labels herself bisexual, told the London Evening Standard in 2010 that her father, a Korean War vet, molested her when she was eight. Her mother then abandoned her five years later. “It was traumatic—but to be left with our crazy dad, doubly so,” she told the paper.
Writer, poet, feminist, gay activist and S&M advocate, Dorothy Allison, was repeatedly raped by her stepfather. It started when she was five and lasted for seven years, stopping when she finally found the courage to tell a relative. The abuse later resumed and lasted another five years. She eventually contracted gonorrhea from him.
In a video interview that appeared in the DVD extras of the documentary After Stonewall, Allison lets the cat out of the bag on a number of common pomosexual perspectives that public-relations types championing the normalization of homosexuality would like to keep under wraps: a low view of marriage and monogamy and how the triad she, her lesbian partner and the gay father of their child formed she believes is every bit as good and legitimate—and perhaps even better—a family and child-rearing structure as “Ozzie and Harriet’s.” Along with these admissions, her “straight men/father-issues” and their influence on her sexual orientation were very much on display for anyone who cared to consider them objectively, without the filter of the pro-pomosexual agenda.
Queen Latifah, who is widely rumored to be a homosexual and has provided lots of evidence to support it, told Essence Magazine in 2009 about being sexually abused as a child. “He violated me…I never told anybody; I just buried it as deeply as I could and kept people at an arm’s distance. I never really let a person get too close to me.”
The quote is a telling one. No thinking person will deny that sexual abuse can have an enormous impact on the victim’s psyche. Latifah openly acknowledges that it led to serious commitment issues that have kept her from marrying. No controversy there. Ditto all manner of other well-documented psychological and physical problems connected with childhood sexual abuse: poor self-esteem, frigidity, promiscuity, disassociation during sex, bi-polar disorder, obesity, depression, anxiety disorders, feelings of profound shame, PTSD, substance abuse, impulsivity, self-harm…on and on. But when it comes to also influencing a person’s sexual orientation—something that more and more studies and pomosexuality advocates acknowledge as being fluid, particularly among women, and therefore impressionable…well only a idiot or a homophobe would dare suggest such a thing
You know you’re up-to-your-eyeballs in a massive propaganda campaign, delusional groupthink, or both when you run across this level of entrenched denial and irrationality.
In her autobiography The Truth Is . . .: My Life in Love and Music, Melissa Etheridge shocked more than a few people—including her sister, Jennifer, no doubt—by writing very openly about her sexual initiation. When Melissa was six, Jennifer starting molesting her. The abuse lasted for four years.
On top of that, like Rosie O’Donnell and Chastity Bono, Etheridge also described feeling distant from her mother—already noted as another common factor in sexual confusion. And while she can admit to the gay magazine Advocate that these experiences “definitely set (her) to go down that road” to homosexuality and further told USA Today that the sexual abuse “…makes me who I am today” (6/15/2001), she nevertheless insists that she was “definitely born gay.”
Yep. And so-and-so’s genes and not her two-pack a day habit is why she’s dying of lung cancer.
This would all be laughable if it were not so tragic—for the individuals caught up in this madness as well as for its impact on our culture’s destiny.
I could go on…but will close with this: In 2011 The Advocate ran a story on Don Lemon, the CNN news anchor who had recently come out as a homosexual. The article noted the sexual abuse he experienced as a boy from a neighborhood pedophile.
Several readers responded online to the story. The following comment not only connects the dots between abuse and sexual orientation, it powerfully demonstrates the extent to which our culture’s mad rush to normalize homosexuality is blinding us to what should be the most obvious thing in the world: that is―as pomosexual editor Laura Autoniou observed in our opening quote―a “remarkable percentage” of (homosexuals) are the victims of sexual abuse.
“I am very happy to be a… gay person. But if I admit being raped as an 8-year-old then most people think that I am gay because of being raped. It is as if I don’t own my own personality in their eyes, that it was inflicted upon me. Even worse some will invariably believe that I can be “cured” by coming to terms with being raped. Sometimes I want to talk about it, but I hate how people see me when I do.”
No one should ever be made to feel shame or looked down upon for the brokenness they experience as a result of being victimized. Quite the contrary, they need and deserve our compassion, love and respect. But in the same way we would never dream of affirming a victim’s substance-abuse, depression, detachment disorder, or poor self-esteem as something they should accept and embrace and we as a society should normalize and celebrate, neither should we let our love, compassion and respect for homosexuals sentimentally devolve into affirmations of their sexual or gender disorder. That’s not love.
In the end, it will look a lot more like hate.
 A word coined within the LGBTQ community; short-hand for “post-modern sexuality.” Pomosexuality refers to a non-norientation in which people disregard all sexual and gender labels and are free to express themselves however they want.
We can now add to the list of risks associated with the homosexual lifestyle its impact on the frontal lobes and logic centers of the evangelical brain. Faced with the rising “gay” tide, multiple thousands—perhaps millions—of professing Christians are becoming both hosts and transmitters of a peculiar form of cognitive dissonance: embracing two incompatible ideas and somehow making peace with the disharmony.
I’m speaking here of the idea that active, unrepentant sexual activity between two same-gendered people is consistent with Christian beliefs and practices.
The solvent for forging this artificial union or peace (see Jer. 6:14)? A skewed view of Christian love, grace, mercy and forgiveness.
An important distinction needs to be made here between this and the other, more manifestly rebellious method some professing Christians use to reconcile the two: twisting scriptural references to homosexuality to mean something other than their clear meaning and what 99% of biblical scholars over three millennia have taken them to mean. In other words, advocating that when properly practiced God blesses homosexual behavior and that it is just as conducive to human and societal flourishing as heterosexuality. I am specifically addressing here Christians who still believe that homosex is wrong—or at least sub-optimal—but also believe that Christian love and forgiveness call for us to accept it.
I was recently confronted with this insidious meme for the umpteenth time while strolling through a special event held at an upscale shopping and dining development. It was a Kid’s Fare and the streets were dotted with booths and presentations catering to pre-teens. One was sponsored by a local church. Still looking for a congregation to join after moving to Cleveland, I stopped and visited with a nice lady who was handing out gift bags and talking up the impressive variety of programs her church had to offer children in the community. As we chatted, it was clear she was genuinely sincere and excited about Jesus and her faith. Yes, her church believed in the inerrancy of Scripture. Ditto the bodily death and resurrection of Christ. And yes, Jesus was the way, the truth and the life. Not wanting to monopolize her time, I decided to cut to the chase and ask “the question”—one that sadly has become one of the better gauges as to a particular church’s position on the “pillar and ground of truth” scale. (1 Tim. 3:15)
“Where are you guys in relation to the issue of homosexuality and gay marriage?”
She blinked and opened with what I have found to be a standard, evasive response: “We love and support all people and want to help them on their journey with God.”
“Fantastic!” I replied. “But what does that practically mean for someone who is actively engaged in a homosexual lifestyle?”
After a few more ambiguous comments, she finally cut to the chase, revealing the infectious meme. To better understand this affliction, I will break it down—with brief commentary—in sections.
1. “Look, we’re all sinners.” Very true. And I’m a candidate for the chief of them. But note the clear inference here: homosex is sinful. No one would respond to a question about whether their church accepts homeless people, dentists, or Germans by noting, “We’re all sinners.” Somewhere in that brain of hers the Biblical truth was still alive, if not well: God never intended for a man to lie with another man as he would a woman. (Lev. 18:22; Rom. 1:27)
2. “Jesus came to save sinners.” Once again the implication is that homosex is sinful. But here we need to remember that Jesus came to not just atone for sin, thus saving sinners. He also came to deliver them; to save them “from their sins” (Matt. 1:21); to work in them the grace so that they can “go and sin no more.” (John 8:11) And that certainly includes—more necessitates—that sinful acts be acknowledged as being just that: sinful.
3. Then she spoke about herself: how she had her first child outside of marriage, further that she was divorced. (Again, I can relate on both counts. Worse, as an unmarried college student I had my first child executed by an abortionist.) “My church accepts me,” she said. “Shouldn’t we accept gay people as well?” Well, that depends on what we mean by “accept.” Receive, love and honor them as broken, fallen image-bearers-of-God like the rest of us? Absolutely! Patiently, compassionately join them on our collective journey towards the Celestial City. Of course! But that also means acknowledging that there is a prescribed path to that City, a highway of holiness that God has raised up for us to walk upon. (Isa. 35:8) And divorce, abortion, premarital sex, homosex and a host of other beliefs and behaviors are not only not paving stones on that highway; far worse, they are pitfalls, sloughs and dungeons that can profoundly hinder our journey. It is true every pilgrim will experience one or more of them. And that’s why there are divorce recovery groups, addiction programs, ministries to women grieving over their abortions, and more. But there is a universe of difference between that and normalizing a particular sin by trying to pretend a noxious swamp is really a verdant pasture. And sacralizing homosexuality with the label “marriage,” or pretending that people who engage in homosex can have an inheritance in the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9) is to attempt precisely that.
4. Now a little defensive, she shrugged her shoulders and joined the chorus of other professing believers who have shared similar answers with me over the past five years: “Jesus is all about love and forgiveness. God desires mercy and not sacrifice. Judge not lest you yourself be judged. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone. Neither do I (Jesus) condemn you. Jesus preferred hanging out with those who had been marginalized by polite society. By grace we have been saved, not works. God is love, love, love, love, love…”
To her and any professing Christian infected with this meme and blithely suppressing the dissonance it logically, necessarily carries with it: You are not reflecting God’s love by making someone feel comfortable with their sin. That would be more like hate. And by adding your “Amen” to the chorus of those normalizing homosexuality, you are far from showing mercy. Like it or not, you have joined forces—however unwittingly—with the Dark Fowler. (Ps. 91:3) You are helping set snares for other souls. And that may well include a young man in your family, church or community who is estranged from his father, struggling with teen angst and identity issues and who suddenly finds himself being lead into temptation by a homosexual man (perhaps a relative or neighbor) that has shown an interest in him.
The Apologetics Group is a not-for-profit educational ministry dedicated to creating and distributing godly resources that can help awaken our culture from its current state of apathy. All gifts are tax deductible for US citizens. You can either donate here using your credit card or Paypal accounts or you can send a check to: The Apologetics Group, 5543 Edmondson Pike, Suite #88 Nashville, TN 37211-5808. If you need more information about any project you can email us at firstname.lastname@example.org
Any day now the Supreme Court is going to announce its decision on Obergefell vs. Hodges, one of the most paradigm-shifting cases in its 226-year history. At stake is whether the definition of marriage that has stood for millennia – that is the union of one man and one women – is in need of a makeover in order to include same-sex couples. Personally, I expect their decision to be 5 – 4 against the traditional, default position. But even if it simply moves the homophile agenda forward rather than granting it the blank check it’s been lobbying for, the die is cast. The center of the target for human sexuality toward which all of us have been designed, programmed and then proscribed by our Creator to aim is eventually going to be completely erased here in America (and most of the so-called First World) as far as man-made laws and dominant public mores are concerned.
You can count on it.
The reasons for this extraordinary, rapid shift in legal and public opinion – likely unprecedented in American and perhaps even world history – are many and varied. But as an observer looking through the lens of a Christian worldview there is, in my opinion, one key straw that did the camel in. The “meat” of American culture is rotting because the “salt has lost its savor.” (Matt. 5:13)
There are many ways in which the Church collectively and Christians individually have become lukewarm (Rev. 3:15, 16) and have thus failed to retain our inherited saltiness. (I know we’re dealing with metaphors here. But this is an example where literal chemistry still applies. Run lukewarm water over a block of salt and behold: it melts and you’re left with some tepid, briny water that is only good for helping people poop or throw-up.) Among them:
1. Worldliness – compromise in matters relating to Lordship; chastity (pre-marital sex, pornography, adultery, etc.); gender roles; the sanctity of marriage (unbiblical divorce and remarriage); soaking up entertainments that have championed the post-modern-sexual (pomosexual) ethos; worldly dating patterns and ideas concerning human sexuality (e.g. that a person can’t live a full life unless they are partnered and having great sex); etc..
2. Our failure to obey our God-given mandate to “tend, protect and cultivate” the broader world (Gen. 1:28; 2:15) – which includes a focused engagement in culture-forming arenas such as academia, the arts and politics.
3. Handing the majority of our children over to Pharaoh to be educated – and hence – indoctrinated in a humanistic, relativistic, and pomosexual worldview.
4. Calling it “traditional marriage” and primarily defending it as such rather than taking out the sharp, two-edged sword of presuppositional apologetics and boldly standing with God and biblical marriage. There isn’t time here to develop this somewhat complicated distinction. But by ceding the terms of the debate to the humanists and their fallacious insistence that it take place solely on “religiously neutral” grounds, we have fallen into the Proverbs 26:4 pit: “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself.” (For the reader who understands this distinction, I am not suggesting that natural law arguments don’t play a key role in our broader apologetic. But we should no more lead with them than we should prefer working by moonlight rather than by the full light of day.)
5. Not understanding the times and how the church is called to do respond. (1 Chron. 12:32) See all the above plus the ridiculous reactions of too many pastors and Christians towards homosexuality. Among them: treating it as almost an unpardonable sin and the same-sex attracted person as a separate category of sinner; thinking and acting as if such inclinations are a choice; that every individual homosexual fits neatly into the categories outlined in Romans 1:21-32; and that a couple of prayers, some deliverance, or just getting married to a member of the opposite sex will invariably eliminate homosexual impulses. I could go on and list dozens of other bone-headed responses and clichés I’ve heard Christians use that haven’t even reached the pathetic threshold of “healing the wounds of people slightly.” (Jer. 6:14)
6. A lack of consecration in regard to the divine engines of prayer, fasting and worship. There is a profoundly spiritual component to this struggle (Eph. 6:12). And it is folly and to neglect the spiritual weapons the Lord of Host has granted us for the battle. (2 Cor. 10:4)
7. Fumbling and even ignoring outright our call to boldly proclaim and defend (as well as model; see #1) what the Bible says about human sexuality generally and homosexuality specifically. The bottom-line? When truth falls – stumbles, is unproclaimed and undefended – in the public square, darkness and confusion settle over the people. Justice is driven back, and righteousness stands at a distance. (Isa. 59:14) And so normalizing homosexuality begins to first look plausible…and finally necessary.
In Part 2, I will develop this last point a bit more, particularly in regard to the so-called millennial generation upon whose shoulders much of the battle but most of the blowback for losing it will fall. Just what is the “truth” concerning homosexuality we as Christians are called to proclaim and defend? The answer is perhaps a bit more complex than the stereotypical “The Bible says it and that settles it!” mantra allows. And in Part 3, I will suggest a “modest proposal” to the statistical majority of millennials who have come to believe that God is OK with people being gay.
* Lost… for now. As Christians, we should ever keep in mind the implications of Jesus’ bruised heel over the serpent’s crushed head. (Gen. 3:15) We should maintain a strong confidence in the power of light to vanquish darkness; grace to triumph over sin; love to conquer death; truth to cast down lies; and leaven of the Kingdom to eventually work through the loaf. (Matt. 13:33) We should boldly believe and confess that the God of peace will eventually crush Satan under our feet even as He did for the early Christians who suffered under the anti-Christ persecutions of Nero, Domitian and the Roman emperor cult. (Rom. 16:20) Observing the flow of both Biblical and secular history, we understand that sometimes people and nations have to go backward and down before they can take the next step forward and up. We should believe that our best days are yet before us – though they may only be seen by our children or some other future generation. The profound loss of Christian civilization and the captivity we are and will experience will be temporary. Out of the ashes of a spent, dissipated America, a humble, Godly remnant will arise, repent and rebuild. There will be seed in the stump! (Isa. 6:13)
I’m presently working on a series of articles and videos concerning the sea-change taking place in the West relative to sexual and gender mores. To this end, I’m looking to interview Christian husbands who have been faithful regarding their own sexual integrity.
Now people can and do define this standard differently. Relative to the task at hand, I am using the following standard:
1. Premaritally, you abstained from all forms of genital contact with another person.
2. As a married man there have been zero erotic interactions with anyone other than your wife. You have also never looked at pornography (“soft” like lingerie advertisements and, of course “hard”) to the point of stimulation/masturbation.
If this honestly describes you, I would deeply appreciate your confidential feedback on a couple of questions. If you are willing, please contact me via email me at email@example.com. And please feel free to forward this message to others you think may be interested.
(As an important aside, if the statistics I read are correct, the majority of Christian men who read this will not qualify. If you have godly sorrow about your “falling short” in this regard and are actively taking steps to “practice righteousness” (1 John 3:7), know there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ (Rom. 8:1). Do NOT let the enemy or your own sense of shame keep you from experiencing God’s complete love, forgiveness and acceptance — as well as His power to overcome. Every son of Adam struggles with one or more “besetting sins” in their life. Some by a peculiar combination of nature, nurture, marriage and God’s grace don’t have to fight the temptations of sexual sin as much as others. The only, true Judge of the earth knows. He will sort it all out. He will do right. (Gen. 18:25))
We deeply appreciate your support in helping to create and distribute documentaries, publications and other Christian educational resources. If you need more information about any project you can email us at firstname.lastname@example.org
A high-stakes, zero-sum game is unfolding in the heartland of America. And along with it, a glimpse into the brave new world that is being fashioned by homosexualists and abetted by the timid souls that increasingly “man” the Republican party.
For anyone unfamiliar with the term, “zero-sum” conditions exist whenever any gain on one side in a game or conflict is met with a corresponding loss for the other. Poker or the way two teams move or defend the position of a football on the playing field are two classic examples. But now another, far more ominous one is unfolding in the arena of civil rights. The campaign to normalize homosexuality is threatening to not just push Christians into their own end zone, but out of the stadium as well.
This past Tuesday, Indiana’s Governor Mike Pence did an about-face from his earlier defense of Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Faced with having himself and the state of Indiana branded with the dreaded “H” word (homophobic) as well as potential economic losses due to threatened boycotts (it’s money and not principle that matter in the end after all), Pence threw the bill back to the House, declaring that it needed to be rewritten so it wouldn’t “permit discrimination against gays and lesbians.” And today (Thursday), Republican lawmakers also bowed the knee, offering an amendment that not only gutted the original purpose of the bill (protecting religious liberty and freedom of conscience) but virtually guaranteed an open season on Christians who dared to not compliantly serve the homosexualist campaign. (To learn more the implications of this amendment, read Matt Barber’s insightful commentary here.)
Given the confusion ginned up by the “gay” left and their cohorts in the popular media, it’s important that people understand two things about the original Indiana bill.
First, its language pretty much mirrors the federal version that was signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1993. Championed by the likes of Ted Kennedy, the bill passed the House unanimously and by a 97-3 margin in the Senate.
Second, the idea that the act would, for example, grant a restaurant owner the right to refuse service to homosexuals is a complete myth, a propaganda point invented for the sole purpose of furthering the homosexualist agenda. The Indiana law simply notes that individuals and business owners’ religious values are important and should be taken into account when those beliefs conflict with other policies and values in the public arena. In other words, a Catholic pharmacist doesn’t necessarily have to dispense drugs that induce abortion. A bed and breakfast inn run by a devout Christian family doesn’t necessarily have to allow a homosexual couple to honeymoon under their roof. And wait for this (because it is coming, trust me) – a Christian church can’t necessarily be prevented from firing their choir director after he announces that he has married another man and is having faux sex with him.
Note the italics: the protection of religious liberty is not ironclad but simply recognized by the law as important and to be balanced against compelling government interests so as to find the least restrictive means of furthering that interest.
But even this flimsy token was an affront to the intolerance police on the left. Bowing before their ire, Hovernor Pence not only caved, he revealed the zero-sum nature of what he is helping unleash when he added this glittering nugget of newspeak: “Nobody should be harassed or mistreated because of who they love or what they believe in.”
Really? What if that somebody happens to love God and believe He created marriage and sex and ordained that they be uniquely realized within a covenant (marriage) relationship between one man and one woman? No soup for you. “Heterosexists” and “dinosaurs” (thank-you Miley for sharing your sinsights with us) can and should be harassed at will and further be forced to either offer a pinch of incense to Dionysius or whatever other idol to sexual debauchery man’s rebellion wants to trot out…or lose the right to engage in commerce. (Here it might be good for the reader to consider the broader outlines of Rev. 13:17.)
And herein lies the rub, a simple truth that every American needs to grasp without flinching: when it comes to the inevitable collision between “gay rights” and the religious liberty of the increasingly silent majority that deep down know that homosex is neither righteous or conducive to human, familial and societal flourishing: we are ineluctably on a zero-sum game playing field.
If you don’t believe me, listen to a key playmaker on the other side of the ball. Chai R. Feldblum has served as a Commissioner of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission since 2010. She is a former Georgetown law professor, a noted expert on civil – most notably gay – rights, and herself a lesbian. In a 2006 interview, she used the very term “zero-sum game” in describing the conflict and then explained:
“When we pass a law that says you may not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, we are burdening those who have an alternative moral assessment of gay men and lesbians…” She went on to say that there should be a ” respectful awareness of the religious position” but then concluded that when push comes to shove, it’s the religious position that needs to give up her seat and move to the back of the bus:
“…when religious liberty and sexual liberty conflict, she admits, ‘I’m having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win.'”
Then in a moment of startling, “Tell me your name” honesty, she revealed the true bottom-line in all of this: “Sexual liberty should win in most cases. There can be a conflict between religious liberty and sexual liberty, but in almost all cases the sexual liberty should win because that’s the only way that the dignity of gay people can be affirmed in any realistic manner.” (“Banned in Boston: The coming conflict between same-sex marriage and religious liberty,” The Weekly Standard, May 15, 2006, Vol. 11, No. 33)
There we have it: the dignity of gay people trumps all.
Make no mistake about where this dignity train ultimately, logically leads. Homosexuality – and progressively this will include all its myriad subsets (bi and trans-sexuality, pederasty, promiscuity, S&M, open “marriages”, etc.) – must be treated and viewed to be just as good, true and beautiful – just as conducive to human, familial and societal flourishing – as biblical marriage. Heather being raised by her biological mom and dad, this brave new world will insist, will not have the slightest advantage over the Heather being raised by two moms or two dads where at best only one of them has any biological connection to her. Speech, actions and even thought that fall short of glorifying this Orwellian/Huxleyian ideal will have to be suppressed and eventually eradicated. Why? Because to allow anything else will be to tarnish the dignity of gay people.
“You exaggerate!” some (many?) will say. Well, perhaps a bit. But then again, maybe not. The same or worse would have been said of anyone in 1995 who warned that if the American people and her professing Christians (like Pence or Hovernor Scott Walker in Wisconsin, who is waging a similar campaign in his state) continued their decline into lawlessness and doing “what is right in their own eyes,” that homosexuality and gay marriage would become widely accepted in twenty years.
 Individuals that accept homosexuality as a moral and social good, on a par with heterosexuality, and want to see it normalized both legally and socially.
(Author’s note: The reader perhaps knows that the CEO of Apple – the most valuable company in history – recently came out publicly as a homosexual. In an interview with Business Week magazine (“Tim Cook Speaks Up,” 10/30/14), Tim Cook declared he is “proud to be gay” and considers “being gay among the greatest gifts God has given” him. My thoughts that follow were inspired by his confession.)
I am the CEO of a small ministry that uses Apple products. I very much appreciate the incredible things their customers can achieve with them.
Throughout my professional life, I’ve tried to keep the focus of the ministry on Jesus and His word and how they relate to the big questions and issues of life: creation, fall, redemption and destiny. I have never sought to bring attention to myself. However, given the trend towards using one’s position in the public eye to advocate for certain regressive lifestyles and worldviews, I’ve come to realize that my desire for personal privacy has been holding me back from doing something more important: speaking up on behalf of a shrinking minority – people who believe that sex is a powerful and beautiful act that optimally belongs only in the context of a life-long, covenantal relationship between one man and one woman. That’s what has led me to today…and to this confession:
I have a fallen, sinful nature. Using the helpful – and in this instance relevant – analogy of a computer, this nature has profoundly gummed up my Operating System. As a result, it orients me towards all manner of things that are contrary to the operational parameters my Creator designed for me to obey in order to optimize system performance – both for myself and the good of those around me. One of them is the desire to have sex with women I am not married to. (Thankfully, I have been able to successfully resist this temptation.) This orientation is not something I want to experience or went looking for. It really seems I was just born this way. I am not proud of this orientation at all. As with my propensity to be selfish, impatient and not love everyone, particularly my enemies, I deeply regret it.
That said, I consider the cross of Christ and the outpouring of His grace and love through it – His death, resurrection, ascension and coronation – to be the greatest gift I have ever received from God. Not only do they cleanse me from the stain of these orientations, they further grant me the power to hate them and successfully wrestle against their corrupting power.
I can’t wait for the Great Day when my carbon-based quantum computer is rebuilt, my present OS wiped clean and the new and final version (completely free from the pesky viruses that infected the original) is installed and made fully operational.
I pray for Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook, to experience this positive side of the Final Singularity as well. But as long as he continues to love one of the more pernicious viruses that have infected OS ver. 1 – and particularly encourage others to do the same (Luke 17:2) – he will fall into this Singularity with it intact, operational….but tragically incapable of functioning in the New World to come.
And then there will only be weeping and the gnashing of teeth.
I’ve been saying for almost a decade that gay marriage will be accepted and legalized throughout America. And all manner of cultural forces will be progressively unleashed in an effort to normalize homosexuality and other related beliefs and practices.
The Supreme Court’s decision on Monday to not consider – and thereby, in effect, reject – the appeals of five states (Virginia, Oklahoma, Utah, Wisconsin and Indiana ) whose prohibitions on gay marriage had been ruled unconstitutional by regional federal appeals courts is a huge step in this normalization process; perhaps the largest to date.
As a result, the number of states permitting gay marriage just jumped from nineteen to twenty-four. Six more states (North Carolina, West Virginia, South Carolina, Wyoming, Kansas and Colorado) have similar bans that are directly affected by the same lower-court rulings. The Supreme Court’s tacit endorsement Monday of those rulings means those bans will likely soon fall as well.
Thirty states down, twenty to go.
In addition, within hours of the ruling, two 26-year-old women became the first couple to be legally declared “wife and wife” by the Commonwealth of Virginia. They will be followed by many more homosexual couples in Virginia and the other four states, joining the tens of thousands of same-sex marriages performed in America since Massachusetts became the first state to recognize them in 2004. And observers on both sides of this issue agree: you can graph the increase in the number of homosexual marriages against the likelihood that the Supreme Court will eventually rule that state bans on gay marriage are constitutional and thus permissible. The lines go in opposite directions. In other words, the more gay marriages take place, the more accepted and entrenched they become as a legal right and a cultural norm.
I hope I’m wrong. But I will say it again: “Gay marriage will be accepted and legalized throughout America. And all manner of cultural forces will be progressively unleashed in an effort to normalize homosexuality and other related beliefs and practices.”
Let me be very clear: In saying this I’m in no way suggesting so-called traditionalists throw their hands up in defeat and stop defending as truth and an optimum social norm the Bible’s prescriptions concerning marriage, gender and human sexuality. God has called us to be faithful, not necessarily always successful – at least not in the short term. If we are to suffer temporary defeat (we have and I predict it will continue and intensify); if some of us end up suffering loss, or are jailed, beaten or worse for peacefully refusing to go with the flow on these issues: let’s go down faithful and fighting – with our boots on and integrity intact.
This battle will be won by the Lord eventually; truth in time will always trump a lie. But that doesn’t mean it can’t “stumble in the public square” and unrighteousness prevail for a season. (Isa. 59: 14) Still we should ever take heart: light will at last dawn and push back the darkness.
The question before us now is just how dark it will become…and what the “children of light” (1 Thess. 5:5) are going to do in the midst of it. We’ll explore this in more detail in subsequent parts. I would also love to hear your own thoughts and suggestions on the subject. Email them to me at WhenTruthStumbles@gmail.com.