Archive

Archive for the ‘Ethics’ Category

Albert Mohler Calls Gay Conversion Therapy ‘Superficial;’ Says Homosexuality Is Sinful but People Need Redemption, Not Repair

By Michael Gryboski , Christian Post Reporter

Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, has suggested that the Church should not seek to convert homosexuals to heterosexuality.

During a news conference held by the seminary and the Association of Certified Biblical Counselors, Mohler said he was opposed to reparative therapy, which involves changing a person’s sexual orientation from homosexuality to heterosexuality, dubbing it a “superficial” approach.

“The Christian Church has sinned against the LGBT community by responding to this challenge in a superficial way,” said Mohler. “It’s not something that is so simple as converting from homosexual to heterosexual, and from our Gospel-centered theological understanding that would not be sufficient.”

 

 

 

Read the entire article here.

Which Way, Evangelicals? There is Nowhere to Hide

June 18, 2015 1 comment

by Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr.

The very first issue of Christianity Today is dated October 15, 1956. In his first editorial, Carl F. H. Henry set his course for the magazine: “Those who direct the editorial policy of Christianity Today unreservedly accept the complete reliability and authority of the written Word of God. It is their conviction that the Scriptures teach the doctrine of plenary inspiration.”

Henry also affirmed continuity with the great orthodox tradition of biblical doctrine and moral principles: “The doctrinal content of historic Christianity will be presented and defended. Among the distinctive doctrines to be stressed are those of God, Christ, man, salvation, and the last things. The best modern scholarship recognizes the bearing of doctrine on moral and spiritual life.”

In that same issue, Billy Graham stressed the authority of the Bible in evangelism. “I use the phrase ‘The Bible says’ because the Word of God is the authoritative basis of our faith,” Graham said. “I do not continually distinguish between the authority of God and the authority of the Bible because I am confident that he has made his will known authoritatively in the Scriptures.”

 

 

 

Read the entire article here.

Seven Things You Can’t Do as a Moral Relativist

February 16, 2015 3 comments

So you’ve decided to become a moral relativist. Good for you! What could be better than doing whatever feels right? What could be worse than letting someone tell you what you should and shouldn’t do? Plus, it’s one of the easiest worldviews to adopt: Just leave everyone else alone and demand that they do the same for you, and you’ll never have to worry again about whether your actions are right or wrong. In fact, there are really only seven things that you can’t do as a moral relativist. Simply follow the rules below, and you’ll be free from absolutes forever!

 

 

 

 

Read the entire article here.

Biblical Theology and the Sexuality Crisis

September 23, 2014 1 comment

By Albert Mohler

Western society is currently experiencing what can only be described as a moral revolution. Our society’s moral code and collective ethical evaluation on a particular issue has undergone not small adjustments but a complete reversal. That which was once condemned is now celebrated, and the refusal to celebrate is now condemned.

What makes the current moral and sexual revolution so different from previous moral revolutions is that it is taking place at an utterly unprecedented velocity. Previous generations experienced moral revolutions over decades, even centuries. This current revolution is happening at warp speed.

 
Read the entire article here.

Benjamin Keach’s Definition of Drunkenness

John Owen on Abortion

January 19, 2014 2 comments

Reformed Baptist Fellowship

John Owen

Paul tells us of the old Gentiles that they were “without natural affection (Rom. 1:31). That which he aims at is that barbarous custom among the Romans, who ofttimes, to spare the trouble in the education of their children, and to be at liberty to satisfy their lusts, destroyed their own children from the womb; so far did the strength of sin prevail to obliterate the law of nature, and to repel the force and power of it. Examples of this nature are common in all nations; amongst ourselves, of women murdering their own children, through the deceitful reasoning of sin. And herein sin turns the strong current of nature, darkens all the light of God in the soul, controls all natural principles, influenced with the power of the command and will of God. But yet this evil hath, through the efficacy of sin, received a fearful aggravation…

View original post 34 more words

Adultery Prevention

December 12, 2013 2 comments

One of the most depressing aspects of blogging is having a blog post ready, then checking Challies before you post, only to see him tackle the same subject earlier this morning. But if that post was how people fall into extra marital affairs, then this is how people who have remained faithfully married have, by grace, done so. Here are some practical ways to maintain faithfulness to your spouse. (I am writing from a woman’s perspective, but much of this would apply to husbands as well.)

 

Read the rest here.

Response to comment about Chris Broussard article

A while back I placed an article on my blog entitled “Should Chris Broussard be suspended from ESPN”. I had a commenter comment on this post, who claimed to be a Christian, but in the final outcome he did not view civil laws as being derived from God, but makes the claim that man is autonomous to make his own civil laws as he sees fit. I approved the commenter’s first few comments, but when the commenter began to rail and accuse my responses as being Pharisaical, I then cut the commenter off. Here is the final comment from this individual.

 

“You clearly responded without reading my statement… Your statement represented the puny thinking of a closed mind – not even the willingness to read the statement you’re addressing!
1. I celebrated Chris’ statement and agreed with it based on Romans 1, which I noted.
2. I satiated that I adamantly disagree with homosexuals marriage.
3. Civil rights are derived from being a citizen of the country you live in, based on that country’s laws.
4. Your Pharisee mentality really speaks to the parable of the toothpick in the versus the telephone pole in your own…
Read what was written before you waste time responding to your own issues.”

 

First my comments to this individual were not driven by the puny thinking of a closed mind for reasons that I will state in my next few points.

Secondly, this individual claimed that he celebrated Chris Broussard’s statement by appealing to Romans 1; yet had he believed Romans 1, then he would not declare that civil laws are derived from men whom have an autonomous mind set.

Thirdly, this commenter claimed that he disagreed with homosexual marriage. If this were true then he would not be a liberal concerning civil government.

Fourthly, this individual claims that civil rights are derived from being a citizen of the country in which one lives. It is true that civil rights are given to individuals within the country of which they live, but to make the claim that these countries have the right to make any and all laws that they so choose is to view the world through an autonomous mindset. Men can and have gotten together within the government systems of the countries, of which they live, and have made laws to govern their country. But do these individuals have the right to change the laws of nature, of which God has placed within this universe? This is the question. Men have no more right to change the week to an eight day week, than they do to allow two homosexuals to marry. God established the seven day week pattern from creation and has also established the marital pattern, of one man and one woman being united in holy matrimony, from creation. When these government officials make laws, against the laws of which God has established, then they are acting against God himself and shall be brought into judgment. Remember the nations that forget God shall perish Psalm 9:17.

Fifthly, this individual argues like an atheist. Atheists make the claim that morality is derived from nature. Yet nature is amoral. Since nature is amoral, then morality could not be derived from nature. Other Atheists claim that societies make up their own system of morality and this is where morality comes from. If this were true, then which society has the right system of morality? We see nations governed by Totalitarianism, Socialism, Communism, Democracy, etc… Certainly if morality were derived from society, then we should see a unified system across the globe, which is in place for the good of all individuals. The fact that there is diversity in the governing of countries just shows that there is one moral system, of which men have corrupted and perverted. For instance, no matter where one goes, most people believe that lying, adultery, and theft is wrong. The reason there is a unified concept concerning these things is because morality is something that is not inherent within us, but something that comes from outside us. It is a transcendent law that presses down upon all men. If this were not true, then no one would have the right to call other society’s actions immoral. Matter fact, if this were not true, then no one would have the right to call their neighbor’s actions immoral.

This is the same for civil laws. Government has been established by God as a means to thwart evil. Romans 13 states, that those in government positions are there as ministers of God for the purpose of thwarting evil. But just because certain governments don’t hold to the Bible, as its guide, does not mean that they are not accountable to establish laws that thwart evil. As I mentioned above, the laws of morality transcend us and are pressing down upon us. The laws that are established by government should be established for the betterment of society, not for the destroying of it. Therefore laws that allow two people of the same sex to marry and adopt children, not only destroys the foundation of society, but is an act of defiance to God, who established foundational laws that should govern society.

Finally, this blog views the world through what could be called a Biblical World view. In other words, this blog interprets all things through what God has declared. Anyone who does not see the world through the lens of the Bible has taken an anti-God and anti-Biblical approach to natural things. The Biblical approach to the universe is not the mindset of a Pharisee, but should be the mindset of all of God’s chosen elect. We are never to accept what God says concerning how to run the church, but then reject what he says about how men are to behave themselves within a societal setting. We are to accept what God has stated concerning both areas in question. God alone knows what is best. This is why he gave men commands, of which to obey, within the realm of this world. One man and one woman, united together in holy matrimony, shall keep diseases at bay, and also reproduces in order that society can continue. Without these foundational principles in place, no society will last long. Two men and two women cannot reproduce offspring. Two homosexuals that come together and adopt children cannot raise those children in the same way that a heterosexual couple could. The process going on within our legal arena in this country will have drastic and irreparable consequences. 

Should Chris Broussard be suspended from ESPN

It seems that intolerance has become a normal response from the homosexual and or atheist community concerning the freedom of speech exercised by Christians in calling sin, sin. When a Christian, no matter what field of work they are in, state that certain things are sinful, then those who claim that Christians are intolerant bigots, actually show their true colors.

Atheists and homosexuals do not want the same rights as Christians or married couples, but instead would rather have special rights. They want to be able to silence everyone who disagrees with them, while at the same time speaking whatsoever they desire. In this they show that they are the true intolerant, bigots.

Chris Broussard, an employee of ESPN, can’t come out and freely state what he believes about homosexuality, but an athlete, movie star, musician, etc…. can freely state that they are homosexual without anyone making a big fuss about it, including those within the Christian community. In other words, Christians are not the ones who try to silence and violate the free speech of atheists or homosexuals, but instead the shoe is on the other foot.

Before I introduce this article from CP Entertainment, I want to plainly declare that an atheist is a fool for denying that God exist, even to the extent that he claims to be rational, while not using reason Psalms 53:1. On the other side we have homosexuals claiming to be born with desires for members of the same sex, but Leviticus 18:22 is plain that this type relationship is an abomination before God. So both Atheists and Homosexuals are committing sin against their Creator.

Here is a portion of the article concerning Chris Broussard:

 

Chris Broussard should be suspended from ESPN, according to over 20,000 Americans who signed a petition helmed by a religious organization.

Broussard, the 44-year-old ESPN analyst, recently sparked a debate when he spoke out against the NBA’s first active player to admit that he was a homosexual, Jason Collins. While Collins, 34, spoke about being gay and Christian in Sports Illustrated magazine recently and in follow-up interviews, Broussard appeared on ESPN’s “Outside The Lines” to say the NBA player claiming to be Christian was glorifying a lifestyle that contradicted biblical teachings.

Faithful America, a online religious community that promotes left-wing agendas, does not agree with Broussard’s stance. The community is calling for ESPN to suspend Broussard and created a petition called “Tell ESPN: Don’t Use The Bible to Gay Bash Athletes” which over 22,000 people signed on faithfulamerica.org.

 

For the rest of the article click here.

An apologetical argument against abortion

Argument for the Silent: A Biblical Case against Abortion

by Robert M. Bowman, Jr

 

Nowhere in the Bible is abortion mentioned specifically. That silence may seem to leave room for Christians to hold different opinions as to the morality of abortion while remaining faithful to the teachings of Scripture. Yet within Christianity an interesting alignment has developed on this issue. Nearly all churches and groups that view the Bible as the unerring Word of God also view abortion in all or nearly all instances as immoral. By contrast, nearly all churches and groups that view the Bible as a fallible human witness to God view abortion as a matter of personal choice rather than of objective morality.1 It seems reasonable to conclude that biblical values (at least some of which are shared by some non-Christians) inform the position that abortion is immoral, while the opposing view is in some respects out of keeping with biblical ethics. This article supports this conclusion by setting forth a biblical case against abortion.2

First, a brief comment about terminology is in order. Those who say that abortion is immoral label their position pro-life, indicating that for them the issue is not women’s rights but the life of the unborn. Those who argue that abortion is not generally immoral label their view pro-choice, emphasizing their belief that the issue is the right of women to choose whether to continue their pregnancy or end it by abortion. These terms will be used, since they are the labels each side prefers to use for themselves.

 

Read the rest here.