Sexual Morality

Sexual morality isn’t normally a topic of apologetics ministries but it should be, because it’s an important teaching which is usually overlooked due to how the world looks at it.

For the Christian all sexual activity must be within the bounds and bonds of marriage, yet so very many of our young believers fall into sexual sin because the world says there is no such thing as sexual sin.

I have played my pipes for at least 50 weddings in the past 40 years (and attended at least 20 as a guest), both Christian and for unbelievers. The sad thing is that it is very obvious with both kinds that with many the couples have been living together or at least sexually active.

My wife came across a TV program while sitting doing hand work (sewing, crocheting or other craft) which shows most couples have no shame. The show is titled, Say Yes to the Dress, which is on TLC. (Free ROKU.) It’s about a place in Atlanta which has wedding dresses costing from low into the upper thousands of dollars. It’s so very apparent that most of the couples have been living together for some time and yet they want the fancy white dresses for big weddings. 

The idea of the white dress, as far as I was taught, was the purity of the bride when taking a husband. And yet on that show it doesn’t appear as if any of the women are “pure.” (Of course the husband to be should also be “pure” but his attire doesn’t have such a symbol.)

As noted above, I’ve played for lots of Christian weddings also and, sadly, many of them are obviously not virgin brides due to the devaluing of virginity even in Christian weddings.

This whole discussion was brought about by two things: the TV series and the following citation with which I will end this post.

[A] consequence of devaluing virginity has been the devaluing of marriage. Until the latter half of the twentieth century, one reason men married was that marriage provided the one socially acceptable way to have sex on a regular basis. It was not the only reason men got married—religion and society made marriage and family central values—but now that A) society does not promote marriage, B) religion is dying, and C) many men can get sex with no commitment, fewer Western (and Asian) men and women are marrying than ever before.

Dennis Prager, The Rational Bible, Deuteronomy: God, Blessings, and Curses, pg.350

Examining a Gothard Book, Part 1

One of my blog followers sent me a box of publications by Bill Gothard’s IBLP and other personal teachings quite a while back. So much has gone on in my life that I totally forgot about that box. Recently I came across the box and began looking at the material; oh what a lot to examine and expose!!!

I decided to start with something “easy”: Gothard’s book, 7 Basic Needs of a Wife. It’s an 80-slick-paged paperback. There are so many problems with this book that it would take another book to cover them all! Therefore I will only discuss the most problematic issues. I will be doing this one chapter at a time, so this post is about Chapter 1, “To Depend on God Alone!”

Pg.6:

Love novels and romantic movies are to girls what pornography is to boys. They create an imaginary picture of marriage that is not only unrealistic but also is unattainable.

Um, NO, romance novels and movies are not equivalent to pornography. While some novels and movies can be true-to-life, most are just fantasy and are only emotionally harmful if one indulges too many of them. Porn, on the other hand, is not at all realistic and the people in them are being used and sinning to great degrees.

On page 9 Gothard discusses “Three Levels of Love” and says that God defines the three levels; eros, phileo and agape. These are Greek words and were defined by the Greeks, not by God. Other languages have different words for the same meanings.

Gothard’s example of eros was David’s son Amnon towards his half-sister Tamar, which is fine. But for phileo he says love stops if the person we feel that way towards stops giving to us. So, if you don’t give things to people then you can’t feel phileo towards them? 

But his worst explanation is what he says about agape: “Agape love is not possible as long as we have expectations of those whom we love. Agape love gives to the needs of others with no expectations of getting anything in return. God loved us when we were His enemies. (See Romans 5:10)” So a wife can’t have agape love towards her husband if she expects his love? What if she expects him to provide for her? Expectations don’t always have to be give and take,

Gothard then says the following:

 Ineffective Love: When a wife tries to love God and her husband, neither one gets agape love because her love is divided and it is phileo love, which expects to receive.

Correct Love: When a wife gives all her love and expectations to God, then He is able to love others through her with agape love, which expects nothing in return.

So a wife cannot love God and her husband? Find THAT in the Bible! So if she loves her husband along with loving God, then her love expects to receive something from God and her husband? So she has to give all her love to God and none to her husband? And unless she does so then God isn’t able to love others through her?!? Do people actually love God without expecting anything in return—not even salvation?

Gothard’s idea of love types is downright convoluted, especially when he think God is unable to do something.

"The Message" Bible Is a Corruption

The following was posted on Facebook by Famine in The Land on 1/20/24.

The Message is yet another perversion of scripture. It uses flowery and mystical phrases such as "the unforced rhythms of grace" (Matthew 11:29), but it's a pile of dung. Don't read it, and if your pastor uses it, find another pastor.

Matthew 3:7 - The Message omits the word wrath...too offensive?

1 Cor 6:18 - Adulterers can be "committed" and "intimate!" The Message avoids the biblical definition of sexual immorality - anything outside of marriage or not between a man and a woman. In fact, you'll see that The Message omits the categories of sin listed in 1 Cor 6:9 ("sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,") and replaces them with "Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and everything in it,”

Matthew 5:5 - Being content with "who you are" can mean anything - an excuse to continue in sin, an excuse to avoid repentance, an excuse to pursue the passions of the flesh. 

(Click on the photo to enlarge for reading)

"He Get's Us"?!?

I never watch sports on TV—don’t watch much TV period. I couldn’t care less about sports so I missed seeing the commercials. I guess something pretending to be Christian was advertised and it’s all over the conservative news. For those who aren’t discerning enough to see problems with the ads, this is my warning to wake up and smell the coffee!

He Gets Us advertisements. Just more lies about Jesus and more compromising with the LGBTQ+ agenda.

7 Problems with the He Gets Us Campaign

“He Gets Us” Ad Sponsors Don’t Believe in the Jesus they’re selling.

Robert Gagnon has a good, short commentary:

Regarding the "He Gets Us" Superbowl ad: I thought that it was not Jesus who washed the sinful woman's feet, but the sinful woman who washed Jesus' feet with her tears and wiped his feet with her hair, out of gratitude for Jesus forgiving her sin-debt as an outcome of her repentance and embrace of the gospel (Luke -50). 

Jesus washed his disciples' feet, not the feet of those who did not follow him, as a sign both of his washing away their sins by his atoning death and of their need to serve one another (John 13:1-17). Yes, Jesus washed even Judas' feet, but even he had committed to follow Jesus, though obviously now fallen.

We have no evidence that Jesus went around washing the feet of non-followers. He went around proclaiming, "The opportune time has been fulfilled and the Kingdom of God has come near: Repent and believe in the gospel" (Mark 1:15). His ultimate act of service was going to the cross to make amends for the sin of the world, so that those who repented of their sins and came to believe in him might have life.

Preaching repentance of sins and faith in the gospel for the forgiveness of sins, a staple of the ministry of John the Baptizer, Jesus of Nazareth, Peter, Paul, John, and the rest of the early church is not a message of "hate," but rather a message of love and service. 

"Progressive Christianity" sometimes gets this when it comes to so-called "right-wing" sins (e.g., racism, economic exploitation, xenophobia), but not so much when it comes to "left-wing" sins (abortion, "LGBTQ" immorality, violent protest).

Agglomeration

Yes, it's time share links to articles I've read over the past few weeks, articles which are for edifying and articles exposing false teachings--all good for knowing what's going on in the Church as well as Satan's counterfeit.

Stan gives an excellent teaching refuting the whole claim about homosexuality not being condemned in the Bible or by Jesus.

Along with the above, this article explains the whole problem with the movie 1946: The Mistranslation That Shifted Culture and its misrepresentation of Scripture. Learn how to defend Scripture against those who try to pervert it.

Excellent “Correct-A-Meme”!

Historical Background On The Use Of Altars In The Roman Catholic Church. Excellent history lesson.

Extortion through tithing.  As I noted in a post two years ago, nowhere in the Bible do we find that Christians should tithe their money. For Christians we have one passage that speaks of giving money, 2 Corinthians 9:6-7: He who sows sparingly shall also reap sparingly; and he who sows bountifully shall also reap bountifully. Let each one do just as he has purposed in his heart; not grudgingly or under compulsion; for God loves a cheerful giver. (NAS) It is wicked and greedy “pastors” who demand tithing, and even more wicked to make it a guarantee of prosperity.

Kathryn Krick—a horrible cult-leading, wicked false teacher.

Joyce Meyer. SIGH! She will meet her maker soon and find out just how unsaved she is.

A fairly new YouTuber, Gavin Ortlund, is just another LEFTIST theologian who should not be followed.

In the wake of the Alistair Begg teaching regarding attending same-sex fake marriage, we have a question regarding attend a “same-sex” baby shower.  The advice given relies on scripture-twisting.

Another horrid false “prophet” of the NAR, Tomi Arayomi.

The actor playing Jesus in the blasphemous “The Chosen” believes he’s on a mission from God. So does God really want blasphemous teachings about Jesus to be popularized?!?

Did you know cessationists are ungodly? Neither did I, but heretic Mark Driscoll claims such.

Joel Osteen is nothing but a cult leader (NOT a Christian), suckering his followers into giving him millions of dollars.  Joel Osteen’s church is getting missionaries to visit them—must be true, I read it at The Babylon Bee.

When a Christian college, Wheaton, goes LEFT it can no longer accurately call itself Christian. I’ve reported on Wheaton four times, as far back as 2015, and all they’ve done is get worse.

It's Sin!

(Found on Facebook)

Same-Sex Unions and the Christian Faith

Alistair Begg is compromising on the LGBTQ agenda.  And he doubles/triples down so he’s removed from a conference.

This has led to the following well-written responses:

Why a Same-Sex Couple Could Never Practice Christian Marriage

And this, posted on Facebook, 2/2/23 by Famine in the Land:

Jesus attended a wedding in Cana. We don't have to guess the genders (God/Jesus created two) of the bride and groom, because -> "male and female he created them" (Genesis 1:27), and "Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh" (Genesis 2:24). Paul quotes this verse in his epistle to the Ephesians, and then adds the following: "This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church" (Eph 5:32). In other words, marriage is a metaphor of Christ and the church - something holy. 

Any marriage outside of what Scripture defines is immoral in God's sight, and not a marriage. "Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous" (Hebrews 13:4). We don't honor marriage or God by witnessing or celebrating an immoral union. A good testimony does not affirm sin, a good testimony distances itself from sin. The gospel is not advanced by compromising with this world. The gospel is advanced by proclaiming it and refusing to bow the knee to political correctness or popular culture.

Two people of the same sex can NEVER have a marriage. A “mirage,” perhaps, but not a marriage. And no Christian should ever even appear to celebrate or honor such an unholy union.

Here's another excellent article by Carl Trueman.

Alistair Begg is wrong, as are all those who agree with him.

UPDATE 3/8/24: If you still think it's okay to attend a fake marriage, I suggest you read, "Should a Christian Attend a Same-Sex Wedding?" 

An Unsafe Gothard Teaching

Anyone who puts himself in the hands of doctors for major medical care before calling for the elders of the church is making an unwise decision.

Bill Gothard, cited in A Matter of Basic Principles: Bill Gothard and His Cultic Teachings, by Don and Joy Veinot and Ron Henzel, pg.295

Where in the world doe Gothard find this in Scripture?!? And what medical experience to the majority of elders have? Why is not contacting elders first an "unwise decision"?

The "unwise decision" here is Bill Gothard's!