Marriage and Family

The Triumph of the Therapeutic and the LGBTQ Sexual Revolution

Philosophical and Social Origins of Identity Politics and the LGBTQ Sexual Revolution. Part 3.

A. The Autonomous Self and Expressive Individualism
Recent Gallup surveys show that the number of people in the West who identify as LGBTQ and reject the heterosexual family in preference for “non-binary” sexual relationships is increasing. This extraordinary development is the culmination of a sequence of historical developments in the West beginning from the 17th century. This includes the decline of Judeo-Christian religion, the influence of the Enlightenment-Romantic philosophy of the autonomous self, the erosion of community relationships in secular society, and “expressive individualism”, the modern notion that one must be true to oneself to be authentic.¹

Historically, the individual in the West based his identity on his relationship with God and the community he belonged to. The role of religion and pastoral care was to help individuals to be integrated with their community. The good life required the individual to order his life in conformity to God’s created order, in accordance the mimetic view of life. But skeptical Enlightenment philosophy dispensed with the idea of God. Consequently, nature and social order became desacralized and may be manipulated and exploited to serve the welfare of individuals and society, in accordance with the poietic view of life. If there is no created order, then society and culture are merely social constructs, and if nature possesses no intrinsic meaning or purpose, then human beings must create meaning and moral values for themselves. This led in the emergence of the autonomous individual who defines for himself his moral values, and sets the goal of self-fulfillment on his own terms. Continue reading “The Triumph of the Therapeutic and the LGBTQ Sexual Revolution”

1
“Expressive individualism holds that each person has a unique core of feeling and intuition that should unfold or be expressed if individuality is to be realized…In the twentieth century, it shows affinities with the culture of psychotherapy.”Robert Bellah, Richard Madsen et. al, Habits of the Heart (Uni. California, 1985, 1996), pp. 333-334.

Video Recording of Talk on Bible and Homosexuality by Ng Kam Weng

You can view the one hour video at:
The Bible and Homosexuality

Outline of Talk

A. Getting the Facts Right
– possible causes of homosexuality and homosexual life-style.
– Can homosexual change?
– What the bible says about homosexual practice.

B. Relevant Biblical Texts
– Matt. 19:1-6 – God’s creation order of heterosexual marriage.
– Gen. 19:4-8; Jude 7 – Judgment on Sodom.
– Lev. 18:22; Lev. 20:13 – Homosexual practice as an abomination to the Lord.
– 1 Sam. 18 – Were David and Jonathan in a homosexual relationship?
– Rom. 1 – Homosexual practice is “contrary to nature” or disordered desire.
– 1 Cor. 6:9-10. Homosexual practice, along with other sexual sins condemned..

C. Affirmation
1. Sexual complementarity is good.
2. Marriage is good.
3. Sex is good – Sacramental reminder of the joys of first love.
4. Family Reproduction is good. Learning to love and give.

D. Final Challenge
– Fulfilment in Christ beyond sex.
– We seek humbly to share the wholeness found in God’s grace that brings liberation and substantial healing to our brokenness.

Should Homosexuals be Accepted into Christian Fellowship and Holy Communion?

A Question posed by a reader: “I think the most challenging lowest denominator for me is when a Bible believing Christian says “when I read the Bible sincerely I find a God who accepts same sex marriage but of course it must be monogamous and there should be no infidelity in that marriage (such infidelity … Continue reading “Should Homosexuals be Accepted into Christian Fellowship and Holy Communion?”

A Question posed by a reader: “I think the most challenging lowest denominator for me is when a Bible believing Christian says “when I read the Bible sincerely I find a God who accepts same sex marriage but of course it must be monogamous and there should be no infidelity in that marriage (such infidelity would be a sin). I also accept accountability for all other sins including pre-marital sex”. My challenge is even though I disagree with this brother or sister on his/her view of same sex marriage, should I accept him/her into the fellowship of the church and the Lord’s table? Tough one for me.”

Answer: The short answer is that persons who feel same sex attraction, but choose sexual celibacy and abstinence from homosexual practices out of obedience to the teaching of Scripture should be accepted into the fellowship of the church, including the Holy Communion. Indeed, the church should learn to love and give support to encourage such believers to grow in the Lord (The question of the reparative therapy is a matter to be discussed separately).

First, rather than reinvent the wheel, I shall quote Stanley Grenz from an earlier posts:

Homosexuality: Biblical Perspectives and Pastoral Concerns. Part .1
Homosexuality: Biblical Perspectives and Pastoral Concerns. Part .2

Continue reading “Should Homosexuals be Accepted into Christian Fellowship and Holy Communion?”

Support for Homosexuality Logically Leads to Support for Polygamy

It is fun to read satire, but I usually avoid sharing links to satirical websites as many internet readers are too lazy to follow through with a few additional ‘clicks’ on the menu to double check the background info needed to ferret out genuine from mischievous satirical websites. Remember, the Devil once tempted the … Continue reading “Support for Homosexuality Logically Leads to Support for Polygamy”

Remember, the Devil once tempted the Lord with the opening remark, “It is written.” Nowadays, he has a temptation-software-upgrade – “It is written in the Internet.”

But the ironic observation of Babylon Bee (a satirical website) is right on target about the biblical view of marriage and family of the Nashville Statement:

Continue reading “Support for Homosexuality Logically Leads to Support for Polygamy”

Nashville Statement on Biblical Sexuality: Different Takes by Robert Gagnon and Michael Bird

Related Post: Nashville Statement (2017): A Coalition for Biblical Sexuality [If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the Word of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Him. … Continue reading “Nashville Statement on Biblical Sexuality: Different Takes by Robert Gagnon and Michael Bird”

[If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the Word of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Him. Where the battle rages there the loyalty of the soldier is proved; and to be steady on all the battle front besides, is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point. The Apocryphal Martin Luther]

The Nashville Statement on Biblical sexuality does not answer all the questions that have arisen from the homosexual controversy. It is certainly not a complete, much less a perfect Statement. The purpose of any public statement is defined and delimited by its time and context. Like the historic creeds, it does not aim at full exposition of doctrine as to define the core beliefs and the boundaries of reflection.

Some evangelicals would like to suggest ways to sharpen what is basically an excellent statement. Others express concerns that it is not sufficiently pastoral. Still others, are worried that young people may misunderstand and therefore are put off by the Statement since the media has been effective in convincing many young people that being ‘gay’ does not necessarily suggest a promiscuous lifestyle. These are legitimate concerns. However, public statements have to navigate the fine balance between being concise and being comprehensive. We also need to keep in mind the central goals of the statement and its intended audience. Continue reading “Nashville Statement on Biblical Sexuality: Different Takes by Robert Gagnon and Michael Bird”

NASHVILLE STATEMENT (2017): A COALITION FOR BIBLICAL SEXUALITY

Statement on Biblical Sexuality by CBMW.Org (The Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood) and The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. As many young people are adopting homosexual freedom as the defining cause of their generation, it is good that Evangelical leaders begin the NASHVILLE STATEMENT (2017) with the following affirmations: … Continue reading “NASHVILLE STATEMENT (2017): A COALITION FOR BIBLICAL SEXUALITY”

Statement on Biblical Sexuality by CBMW.Org (The Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood) and The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.

As many young people are adopting homosexual freedom as the defining cause of their generation, it is good that Evangelical leaders begin the NASHVILLE STATEMENT (2017) with the following affirmations:

We believe that God’s design for his creation and his way of salvation serve to bring him the greatest glory and bring us the greatest good. God’s good plan provides us with the greatest freedom. Jesus said he came that we might have life and have it in overflowing measure. He is for us and not against us. Therefore, in the hope of serving Christ’s church and witnessing publicly to the good purposes of God for human sexuality revealed in Christian Scripture, we offer the following affirmations and denials.

Article 1

WE AFFIRM that God has designed marriage to be a covenantal, sexual, procreative, lifelong union of one man and one woman, as husband and wife, and is meant to signify the covenant love between Christ and his bride the church.
WE DENY that God has designed marriage to be a homosexual, polygamous, or polyamorous relationship. We also deny that marriage is a mere human contract rather than a covenant made before God

Article 2

WE AFFIRM that God’s revealed will for all people is chastity outside of marriage and fidelity within marriage.
WE DENY that any affections, desires, or commitments ever justify sexual intercourse before or outside marriage; nor do they justify any form of sexual immorality.

To read, download or sign to affirm the original statement NASHVILLE STATEMENT (2017) by CBMW.Org (A coalition for Biblical Sexuality) and The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.

You may note that many of the original signatories of the Statement are outstanding Evangelical leaders.

Continue reading “NASHVILLE STATEMENT (2017): A COALITION FOR BIBLICAL SEXUALITY”

Disney’s Delicate Homosexual Moment

According to the Film Censorship Board of Malaysia, Walt Disney’s movie, Beauty and the Beast “has been approved…with a minor cut.” But it was the “most unkindest cut of all” for Disney. So it decided that it will simply pull its latest movie from Malaysian distribution rather than allow the movie’s so-called “gay moment” to … Continue reading “Disney’s Delicate Homosexual Moment”

According to the Film Censorship Board of Malaysia, Walt Disney’s movie, Beauty and the Beast “has been approved…with a minor cut.” But it was the “most unkindest cut of all” for Disney. So it decided that it will simply pull its latest movie from Malaysian distribution rather than allow the movie’s so-called “gay moment” to be censored.

Beauty and the Beast Postponed or Banned?

Hmm, one wonders: Is Disney saying that the “gay moment” is so essential to the movie that it must not be touched? This would only confirm the suspicion that Disney has a homosexual agenda. It would add satisfaction to the Malaysian Film Censorship Board that it has indeed got the cut right. Continue reading “Disney’s Delicate Homosexual Moment”

On Male Headship and Female Submission

Sam Storms’ remarkable taxonomic heterogeneity (Amillennial, Calvinistic, charismatic, credo-baptistic, complementarian) may be taken as evidence of a confused mind, but his writings is a model of depth in simplicity which indicates a mind of firm and clear conviction. Given below are some excerpts taken from his four recent posts related to “10-things on male headship … Continue reading “On Male Headship and Female Submission”

On Male Headship
Among the many misconceptions about male headship in Scripture I mention these. First, husbands are never commanded to rule their wives, but to love them. The Bible never says, “Husbands, take steps to insure that your wives submit to you.” Nor does it say, “Husbands, exercise headship and authority over your wives.” Rather, the principle of male headship is either asserted or assumed and men are commanded to love their wives as Christ loves the church…Headship is never portrayed in Scripture as a means for self-satisfaction or self-exaltation. Headship is always other-oriented. I can’t think of a more horrendous sin than exploiting the God-given responsibility to lovingly lead by perverting it into justification for using one’s wife and family to satisfy one’s lusts and thirst for power.

Headship is not the power of a superior over an inferior. Continue reading “On Male Headship and Female Submission”