061210
THEME: A minister
of the Presbyterian Church USA was found not guilty for officiating same sex
marriages. This will lead to disaster for the denomination.
QUESTIONS:
What was the offense?
- The
Presbyterian minister Jane Spahr openly officiated same sex marriages
three times in 2004, 2005, and 2006. This is clearly against
denominational rules and against teachings of the Bible.
What was the result of the hearings?
- She
was found not guilty by a Judicial Commission of the church in California.
The reason was that she had a right to individual conscience over Biblical
and church authorities.
What are the serious consequences?
- Anyone
can challenge the rules of the church, structure for church discipline,
and most importantly, against the authority of the Bible. Such a challenge
will not be disciplined. Anyone in the church can use the right of
conscience to behave in whatever way one feels right. The church is not ruled
by the Bible or their own rules.
- This
is clearly against the teachings of Calvin and Luther who insisted that
the church must be ruled and bound by the Word of God, the Bible. In
PCUSA, the Bible becomes only a guide and a source of wisdom but can be bypassed
by human culture and conscience.
On another similar case:
- In
November, the charges against another Presbyterian minister Jane Edwards
were dismissed unanimously (8-0) on technical grounds. The reason is that
the charges were filed several days after a filing deadline. Obviously,
the church tied to avoid facing difficult doctrinal questions. The
avoidance will only lead to more breaking of their church laws.
==============================
THEME: Secular
liberalism is clearly a rival religion against evangelical Christianity and
will threaten today’s churches.
QUESTIONS:
Who was the first one to pronounce that Liberalism is a
religion?
- J.
Gresham Machen in his book Christianity
& Liberalism in 1921. He argues that Liberalism is the rival religion against
evangelical Christianity.
- Howard
P. Kainz, Professor at Marquette University, also warns that today, modern
secular liberalism is the great rival to orthodox Christianity.
- Some
may argue that “religion in the most common and usual sense connotes
dedication to a supreme being or beings” but since Enlightenment, ‘religion’
has taken on the additional connotations of dedication to abstract
principles or ideals. And Liberalism has many common characteristics like
a religion.
In what ways is Liberalism like a religion?
- Its dogmas: (1) mankind must overcome
religious superstition by means of Reason; (2) empirical science can and
will eventually answer all the questions about the world and human values
that were formerly referred to traditional religion or theology; (3) the
human race, by constantly invalidating and disregarding hampering
traditions, can and will achieve perfectibility.
- Its
designations of sins: homophobia
and sexism.
- Its scriptures: (1) Darwinist and
scientistic writings championing materialist and naturalistic explanations
for everything, including morals; (2) feminist writings exposing the
‘evil’ of patriarchy and tracing male exploitation of females throughout
history up to the present.
- Its priests and priestesses: intellectuals
who can present liberal values in the public square.
- Its congregations: Planned Parenthood,
the ACLU, the National Organization of Women, and similar bodies.
- Its rites and rituals: “gay pride” parades
and pro-abortion rallies.
- Its eschatology: the distillation of
pragmatism asserting that “all lifestyles and all moralities can
approximate this goal, as long as the proscribed illiberal ‘sins’ are
avoided.”
Are there different kinds of Liberalism?
- Not
all liberals are committed to the religious vision of liberalism. There
are many people working for social justice, human rights, international
solidarity, and other causes commonly regarded as liberal without a deep
ideological commitment. Conservatives may find common cause and common
ground with these “moderate” liberals.
- However,
it must be remembered that all persons are, in their own way, deeply
committed to their own worldview. There is no intellectual possibility of
absolute value neutrality.
==============================
THEME: For married
Christians who decide deliberately not to have children is a revolt against
God’s design. This of course does not include married couples who for various
other reasons (such as illness) are unable to have children.
QUESTIONS:
Why do some married Christians reject parenthood?
- The
main reason is that they don’t want kids to get in the way of their
lifestyle, for example, an active lifestyle with frequent travelling.
- It
is part of the sexual revolution. Modern people are determined not only to
liberate sex for marriage [and even from gender], but also from
procreation.
What is the Biblical perspective on children?
- In
the Bible, marriage, sex, and children are part of one package. To deny
any part of this wholeness is to reject God’s intention in creation—and
His mandate revealed in the Bible.
- Couples
are not given the option of chosen childlessness in the biblical
revelation. To the contrary, we are commanded to receive children with joy
as God’s gifts, and to raise them in the nurture and admonition of the
Lord.
- Human
beings procreate and raise children to the glory of God.
Does it then mean that Christians must not use
contraceptions?
- No.
Christians must make contraceptive decisions with great care.
- Christian
couples can make responsible decisions about the timing and number of
children, so long as the marriage is genuinely open to the gift of
children and the responsibilities of parenthood.
What is the danger of contraceptives?
- “The
Pill”—represents nothing less than the liberation of sexuality from both
marriage and procreation. Without the “threat” of pregnancy, unmarried
couples are now free to engage in adultery and other forms of sexual sin
without fear of the imposition of new life in the womb.
- Even
among married couples, something similar has happened: Thanks to the
reliability of contraceptive technologies, husbands and wives are now able
to see children merely as a lifestyle option, rather than as the gifts
that come naturally with the enjoyment of the conjugal act.
==============================