Archive | Homosexuality

RSS feed for this section

Romans 1:32 Illustrated

συνευδοκέω is a Greek term that means “to agree with, give approval to.”  It is found in the final verse of Romans 1 where Paul describes the final state of human sin, one in which mankind, knowing the just judgment of God against sin, not only still engaged in it, but “gives hearty approval” to those who join with them in their rebellion.  Sinners love company, many a preacher has said, and our society is seeing example after example of Romans 1:32 coming to fruition.  Truly, “the wicked strut about when that which is vile is honored among men” (Psalm 12:8).

This was brought to mind this morning when, having a few moments before an appointment, I did a Google search for articles about the USWNT—the US women’s team that just won the soccer World Cup.  I had seen reference made to their public “celebrations” upon returning home to the US, articles that included such terms as “drunk” and “profanity.” It only took a moment to not only discover images, videos, etc., of these women drinking like sailors and swearing a blue streak that would have made any men’s locker room blush only a few decades ago, but also showing them behaving in the most arrogant, self-centered ways possible.  As reprehensible and sad as that is, what truly struck me was something more, something new.

The articles I found were from mainstream media sources in New York—in other words, those pandering to the cultural elites.  And they all shared one thing in common:  a celebration of their behavior. Yes, they celebrated drunkenness.  They celebrated debauchery.  They celebrated dropping f-bombs like raindrops in a thunderstorm.  It’s all good, you see, because, well, they won, and they hate Trump, and they are just expressing themselves, so yeah, get drunk and swear like a sailor—it’s to be expected, accepted, and celebrated.

Only a few decades ago this kind of behavior would have been loudly condemned by everyone, those in charge of the program would have been fired, the players replaced, apologies given. But not today.  No, you see, they are women—and many of them open lesbians—so they are oppressed.  Therefore, those who are oppressed are free from the moral stigma attached to such behavior if engaged in by anyone in the oppressor classes.  Critical theory has no room for a common morality for both the oppressed and the oppressors.  Their intersectionality score gives them the right to behave like drunken kids in public—and they get to be called heroes in the process!

It was quite a reminder that those who know God’s righteous judgment against their sin suppress that knowledge by inviting others to join them in their rebellion.

All Authority is Given to the Risen Christ, Immaturity is Now the Rage, the Jenkins Piece on Sovereign

Started out with a brief study on Matthew 28:19-20 and the incredible words of Jesus, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.”  Do we really believe that?  It matters. Then I looked at the plague of immaturity in Western culture, tying together three different threads in current events.  Then I briefly looked at an RNS piece on the Sovereign group and my dear brother Mike O’Fallon.

Here is the YouTube link:
Live Video Stream
The Dividing Line is on YouTube video. Our YouTube channel also provides videos of most of the debates that Dr. White has done over the years. Take some time and browse it to see if there is something there of interest to you. If you are looking for the next upcoming show be sure to subscribe to the blog as we post show announcements the morning of the show.


More Moore, Tim Staples Speaks Synergism, Steven Anderson and the RBs, Phone Calls, Thoughts on Growth and Change

A little over 90 minutes today looking at Beth Moore’s article released over the weekend first, then moving on to Tim Staples sounding very much like our synergistic friends in his argumentation.  Then we looked at the cooperation of some (to me) local Reformed Baptists with Steven Anderson and how odd that is, took two phone calls (one on spiritual gifts, the other on keeping your cool in apologetic situations) and then I spent a few minutes on the difference between being blown about by every wind of doctrine and true, necessary growth and maturity in one’s own understanding and theological knowledge.

Here is the YouTube link:
Live Video Stream
The Dividing Line is on YouTube video. Our YouTube channel also provides videos of most of the debates that Dr. White has done over the years. Take some time and browse it to see if there is something there of interest to you. If you are looking for the next upcoming show be sure to subscribe to the blog as we post show announcements the morning of the show.

Beth Moore Sort Of Explains…But Not Really

Given I spent a good bit of time yesterday going over the words Beth Moore originally wrote on the subject of homosexuality and then had removed recently I think today’s article she posted should be read carefully and fairly.  I will be brief at this point: Mrs. Moore must know by now that there is nowhere to hide on this topic. She can appeal to emotion and feelings for only so long. There are serious, pointed, important questions that everyone knows she must answer, and the longer it takes her to do so, openly and honestly, the more damage she does to herself, and more importantly, to her followers.  Just a few items:

  1. It seems she is saying, along with people like JD Greear, that homosexuality is just “one sin among many.” That it is not, in fact, “particularly satanic.” And yet, Paul specifically laid it out as an example of the depth to which our rebellion goes, even to the point of damaging the core of our being, and God listed it amongst those sins so pernicious and serious that the land vomited out its inhabitants in Leviticus 18:24-25.
  2. She has yet to interact with what, specifically it was about her words that “exceeded Scripture.” She says she “overspoke,” but the only example she gives is an emotionally-derived hypothetical about a 13 year old struggling with “an onslaught of sexual feelings.” This seems to indicate she now embraces the “born this way” perspective as well.  She likewise conflates categories.  Note her words, “comes to the conclusion that he or she is particularly demonic.” Well, if the person thinks they themselves are homosexuality, I suppose, but the point of the Scripture is to warn us of the nature of the sin to which we are tempted and to therefore flee from it to that which is pleasing in God’s sight. Again, more identity confusion seems to be present here.
  3. She says she holds to a “traditional Christian sexual ethic.”  Well, that is great, but what does that mean when applied in this situation?  Those questions she was asked a few weeks ago would, in fact, clarify exactly this, but alas, we have not received any answers to those questions. So it seems she wishes to say that homosexual acts are sinful (since marriage is only between a man and a woman) but that leaves the issue of orientation undefined and the question of whether that desire needs to be mortified unanswered.
  4. I have often spoken of the dangers and errors of fundamentalism in its modern form, and I think with considerably more accuracy of definition and historical development than Mrs. Moore is providing. It is not “hyper-fundamentalism” to ask her to be clear and plain on this topic.

She closes her piece with a citation of Galatians 5:19-21, but not 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, which would have been directly relevant, I would think.  The questions asked a few weeks ago stand, and need to be answered more now than ever. And the questions I asked, drawn directly from the words she wrote, but has now disowned, must be answered.

One last item.  Mrs. Moore says she holds to a traditional Christian sexual ethic.  Almost everyone I have seen abandon that ethic and embrace the LGBTQ(nowP+) revolution has said the same thing, and given the same reasons for their actions. There is a theological foundation for that sexual ethic.  It is not a matter of what 13 year olds feel, or think.  It is rooted in deep theology, deep commitments to the Christian worldview.  It is not normally a part of visions and dreams and impressions and the like.  It abides and remains from generation to generation and is not altered by the trends of culture or fashion. The question is this: upon what foundation does Beth Moore stand?  And given that others have granted to her a position of teaching authority (whether she should possess that or not is yet another important question), the fact is asking for the foundational views of such a person is completely appropriate and, I dare say, necessary.