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.
No comments:
Post a Comment