Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Gays’

Gendered terms rightly defined by James White

January 7, 2014 4 comments

I would like to share an article from James White at Alpha Omega Ministries. This article is profound in that it rightly defines words such as: father, mother, husband, wife, and marriage; words that today are trying to be redefined. But as James White states, these words cannot be redefined because they are gendered terms and will always describe the object, in which they are being used towards, by their very definition. In other words, just as the term bachelor will always carry with it the meaning of an unmarried man, even so the term husband will always carry with it, the notion of a man who is married to a woman.

Here is the article:

 

 

Mr. Church: That is the Sound of the Barbarians at the Gates

Yesterday I was directed to a Tweet picture that spoke volumes. Here it is:

Pictures can say more than a thousand words, to be sure. And this picture speaks volumes. But I would like to respond to Mr. Church’s interpretation, which I would call the “interpretation of inevitability.”

First, the issue of the abuse of language, the constant ploy of those seeking to degrade the moral and ethical foundation of a culture. The term “homophobe” is one of the most absurd, vacuous, mind-numbing terms ever introduced into the English language. It has no meaningful function, since its actual meaning, and its usage, are rarely concurrent. I do not know any homophobes, personally, since that term would refer to someone who has an irrational fear of their own kind. But that is not how Mr. Church is using it. It is a convenient, if untruthful, term used to slander those who believe homosexuality, as an act and as a lifestyle, is immoral and destructive to human flourishing. Hence it is a convenient way of demonizing an entire position without even offering a meaningful moral or ethical argument. The regularity of its use is witness to the bankruptcy of the position espoused by Mr. Church.

Next, when I look at this picture, many issues crowd my mind. Some I will not enter into here (military readiness, the on-going degradation of the strength of the US and the results that will have in destabilizing the political structures around the world). The main issue though is this: if this is supposed to be a “marriage,” who is the husband, and who is the wife? I am not talking about dominant/submissive roles. I am talking about husbands and wives. See, words have meanings. Marriage has meaning. To marry, as a verb, has meaning, and hence, that meaning is filled out by the direct object of the verb. I, a man, married a woman. Hence, I am a husband, with all the meaning that term carries, to a specific woman, who is my wife, with all the meaning that term likewise carries. All the public education and eradication of human nature in the world cannot remove from those who are created in the image of God a basic, instinctive understanding that “husband” is a gendered term, “wife” is a gendered term, “father” is a gendered term, and “mother” is the most gendered term known to humanity. Hence, “marriage” has a meaning that this picture can never represent, since there is no husband, and there is no wife, in it. Without a husband, you have no marriage. Without a wife, you have no marriage. You can have relationships of all kinds, but what you do not have is a marriage. All the glazed eyes of judges or the wild eyes of zealots can not change this basic reality. This is why we instinctively show pity and compassion to the child who has lost a father or a mother: we recognize the need for both. This is why we likewise look down upon the abusive parent of either gender, and we do so properly. Shame is a proper and good thing when it is used to curb the evil of men and women. But all of these considerations are irrelevant to the picture above, for there is no father, there is no mother, no husband, no wife, no marriage. Just two men kissing, one in uniform. Their strong feelings for each other can never surmount the insurmountable: they cannot be married anymore than they can bear children, fly, leap over tall buildings, or live under water. They were made one way, and their rejection of their God-ordained roles does not redefine marriage.

So the sound I hear when I see this picture has nothing to do with abusing the English language through absurd non-terms like “homophobe.” It has nothing to do with advancement in the 21st century. It has everything to do with the sound the citizens of Rome heard in the early 5th century as those they called “barbarians” swept into the EternalCity. Rome had been crumbling from the inside for centuries—much more slowly, I note, than Western Society today, where such processes take place in the span of a few generations rather than centuries (mainly due to our advanced communications technology). Civilizations that fundamentally reject God’s creative purpose collapse, in time. How else could it be? One will either have a culture of life, or a culture of death, and homosexuality, no matter what else is said about it, does not foster life. It is fundamentally self-centered and narcissistic at its core. The profaning of marriage seen in the above graphic has one inevitable result: it cannot produce life. That which does not produce life tends toward death. That is the bent of this society, just as it became the bent of the later centuries of the Roman Empire. And thus we prove yet once again that those who forget the lessons of the past are doomed to repeat them.

 

Source [Alpha Omega Ministries]

Allowing Women and Gay’s into the Clergy?

The western church is beginning to hit an all time low in it’s acceptance of sin and it’s acceptance of what it will allow that is contrary to scripture. I spent a while today debating with a man who believes that it is alright for women to preach or to hold a Pastoral office. This man argued that he was reading scripture differently than I was and that what I say is plain in scripture is not what Paul states plainly in scripture.

I therefore asked this man if Paul plainly stated, “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.” Upon asking this question my opponent went silent. This is because we both understood the plain meaning of these words. Our interpretations were not conflicting at the moment, though that lasted only a few seconds and my opponent went right back to arguing his views.

The fact of the matter is there has never been any women ordained into the office of Pastor until the 1800’s. Since then churches have not ceased to ordain women into the clergy.

The Presbyterian (USA) also fell prey to this deception and has continued to spiral downward ever since. Their liberal views of scripture has caused a demise in their church attendance and also has caused a demise in what they view as sinful.

Just this past Tuesday they voted to allow gay clergy to hold offices within their churches. I will not dogmatically say that it was because of their step toward ordaining women, but when individuals drop the teachings of scripture in one area; it will not be long till another wall will fall.

Here is a part of the article put out by Christianpost.com concerning the vote which took place this past Tuesday, within the Presbyterian (USA) denomination.

PCUSA Votes to Allow Openly Gay Clergy by Alison Matheson

The Presbyterian Church (USA) has become the fourth Protestant denomination in the U.S. to allow the ordination of Gay and Lesbian Clergy.
It follows a majority vote by the 173 presbyteries (district governing bodies) on Tuesday to change the body’s constitution in order to allow openly gay people in same-sex relationships to be ordained as ministers, elders and deacons.

To read the rest of the article click here

I will write more, later this week, about my debate with the man who believes it is ok to ordain women into the ministry.

Hershel Lee Harvell Jr.