Thursday, September 12, 2013
Christian Preacher Jailed Because of Homosexual Intolerance
BASILDON, England – A Christian street preacher was arrested and jailed last week in England after he was accused by a lesbian bystander of engaging in hate speech against homosexuals. The incident occurred on Thursday while evangelist Rob Hughes was preaching on the streets of Basildon, Essex.
So it seems the persecution against the Christian faith, at least in England, continues. The homosexual versus Christianity issue continues to be an object of fascination for me. What I find to be even more fascinating is the radical subjectivity with which non-Christians view the morality of the homosexual lifestyle. For example, the same people that defend the homosexual lifestyle condemn other forms of sexual behavior as morally repugnant and in some cases unnatural. If it is natural and morally acceptable for homosexuals to “hook-up,” and engage in their orgies and promiscuity as we all know is a way of life in that community, why do some of these same proponents of that community condemn or judge a husband for cheating on his wife, or a man for cheating on his girlfriend, or a player whose only goal is sex with as many men or women as he or she can convince to have sex with them? Why do homosexual proponents find bestiality unnatural and morally repugnant? If homosexuals are genetically engineered to be what they are, why aren’t pedophiles? Why aren’t cheaters simply viewed as genetically engineered that way? Why do the same people that defend homosexuality turn their noses up at swingers clubs, or at husbands who like to watch their wives with other men? Why is it so repulsive for the one and not the other? The only answer I have been able to find is that the non-Christian worldview reduces to irrational nonsense in every form, sooner or later.
How do non-Christians judge whether or not something is right or wrong? The answer to this question, when traced to its basic presuppositions is a little more than embarrassing. For starters, some argue for what is known as Natural-Law Theory as a way to explain morality. NLT claims that there are some basic and unchanging principles that ought to serve as our ethical guide if you will. These principles can be known by all, it is argued. Somehow, these principles have the force of law so the argument goes. Proponents of NLT argue that these principles are supposedly self-evident. The justification for human authority then is located in those moral laws that are themselves derived from natural law. In other words, governments or societies can justify imposing authority on communities because that authority is ultimately derived from the natural order of things. As one will see, this does little to help one understand, exactly, the natural order of things.
Natural-Law Theory fails on several points to serve as justification for human morality. One does not have to probe very many moral issues in order to find serious differences among human opinions. Homosexuality is a perfect example. In addition, what law is it that justifies the concept of authority to start with? What is the rational justification for inferring human morality from natural law? NLT admits that no proof is forthcoming. Furthermore, NLT contends that no such justification is necessary since such truths are self-evident. But this retort is simply an amazing and embarrassing begging of the question.
Another view is that social contract theory is our best hope for providing rational justification for human morality. This theory contends that we all enter a contract individually that places the interest of the group above that of the individual. But what about those who do not wish to go along with SCT? At one time, society rejected homosexual behavior as abnormal. This did not stop homosexuals from engaging in their perversions of human sexuality. In other words, homosexuals rejected the contract. As we look around in our prisons we see millions who have rejected the contract. Hence, social contract theory fails to provide the necessary foundation for human morality and the authority to enforce it.
Whether it is Natural Law Theory, Social Contract Theory, or perhaps Social Utilitarianism, that serves as the basis for human morality one thing is clear: non-Christian theories of human morality all reduce to private subjectivism or cultural relativism sooner or later. The justification for ethics, like justification for theories about metaphysics and epistemology must eventually find its anchor in something that requires no justification, that is, something that is in fact self-justifying, something philosophically intuitive, something that transcends every human and all cultures.
The argument for homosexual behavior is a western argument that has nothing to commend it except for the fact that it is the way people want it to be. And that is not an intellectually sound or logically cogent argument. But it isn’t the problem of homosexuality that mostly concerns Christians in the west these days. It is the fact that homosexuals are demanding an end to Christianity as Scripture defines it, as we know it that is the problem. Homosexuals, more than anyone else, apparently cannot abide being informed that God is opposed to their lifestyle. That He will judge them unless they repent. Why is this group of sinners, apparently different from other groups of sinners, say adulterers or murderers for example? When was the last time an adulterer insisted that Christians shut up about adultery because such language is bigoted and hate speech? So why does the homosexual behave this way toward the Christian gospel?
Christians must keep in mind that some people in this group have purposely been given over to a depraved mind and degrading passions by God Himself. Homosexual behavior is the consequent of divine wrath. Romans 1:18, 24, 26, 28 could not be clearer about this fact. Christians should view this vile behavior as the direct result of a holy God pouring out his wrath on men who despise Him. What else could explain the irrational and nonsensical view that it is perfectly normal for two men or two women to engage in sexual intercourse with each other. When someone attempts to defend the homosexual lifestyle to me, all I actually hear is the wrath of God being poured out on a person that has come to love their sin so much that they have lost their ability to think sanely in any sense of the word sane. This is the inevitable consequence of rejecting our Creator.
How do we respond to these attacks and arguments and the ensuing persecution? Peter commands us to be ready to given an answer for the reason of the hope that is in us. (1 Peter 3:15) With respect and gentleness we give the homosexual community the gospel of repentance. We move not one fraction of one inch from that gospel for any reason whatever. We stop the mouths of those who would argue that homosexuals are Christians the same as heterosexuals by bringing in sound Christian argumentation based in Scripture. In other words, we refute those who contradict the truth of Scripture, the Christian message. (Titus 1:9) We rejoice when homosexuals use their homosexuality to persecute Christians by calling us bigots, making up lies about how we hate them, and by having us arrested for preaching the truth of the Christian message. We consider it an honor and a privilege to suffer for the name of Jesus Christ and for standing firm on His message. Jesus told us that men would persecute us, insult us, and falsely say all kinds of evil against us. (Matt. 5:11-12) Jesus told us to rejoice when this happens, not to respond by seeking privilege in the American constitution. This is not to imply that we should not do what we can to remain free from being imprisoned. It is to say that our attitude and temptation to hate those who want to take away our religious liberty must be resisted above all else. The real temptation for you and for me, especially in America is to develop a certain mindset toward those who are attacking religious freedom. If Satan can get us to adopt a hateful attitude toward them, he has effectively contaminated our religion already. Religious freedom now becomes a moot point.
The only worldview that does not reduce to absurdity is Christian theism. There are really only two worldviews to begin with, when you look at the reality of things. There is the Christian worldview and the non-Christian worldview with all its obscene attempts to make sense out of reality, human knowledge, and human morality apart from, and independent of God. The deluding influence of God’s wrath upon modern man’s sinful hatred of God will only continue to reveal itself in humanity’s intellectual folly as each culture and society seeks to make sense of their world apart from God. They refuse to bow the knee to the Creator, to Whom they owe their very existence. It seems to me that, at the end of the day, homosexuals and their supporters need to address their Christian phobia, their narrow mindedness, and their hateful intolerance of the Christian worldview. They do not seem content to simply leave the issue at the level of verbal disagreement. They want their detractors arrested and silenced. That is a much different position than that held by Christian theism.
This is part 4 of what will likely be a 7-part series dealing with the racial reconciliation movement being pushed by Southern Bapti...
The Contest I was finally able to make it to a James White debate. I have followed Dr. White’s ministry for many years now. His mini...
Kelly James Clark levelled the following criticism against Covenantal Apologetics: “Whenever I read presuppositionalists I almost always ...