Author: Nathan Cherry
Is there really much difference between “going to church” and “being the church”?
Posted on July 11, 2014 in Theology by Nathan Cherry
That’s a question I’ve given a lot of thought to lately and the conclusion is that there is considerable difference. First let’s describe what “going to church” looks like and then talk about what it means to “be the church.”
Going to church is little more than checking a box on a to-do list and believing that you have done your duty. A person who sees church as something you go to is missing the fact that every Christian IS the church.
The typical church where people see going to church as the primary objective is often characterized in a number of ways.
First, the church has an inward focus. This is true because the members are focused on going to church and church is what happens inside the walls of the church building. So the primary focus becomes what church members do inside the church building on Sunday. The lack of external focus inevitably leads to stagnation, starvation, and death. Thom Rainer recently wrote that the most common factor in declining churches is “an inward focus.”
UPDATE: The Latest States to Fall: Utah, Indiana, Wisconsin
Posted on July 10, 2014 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
I’ve been following the judicial activism in states with traditional marriage laws as federal judges, acting alone, usurp the will of the people and enact sweeping changes unilaterally. For previous comments on states that have had marriage redefined for them within the past year or so, scroll down to see an earlier post. (Or click here for my first post on the subject.)
The first post centered around 13 states – conservative states – where marriage was being threatened by judicial activism. Since that first post, much has changed. Two more states were added, Georgia and Wisconsin. Of the original 13 both Utah and Indiana have now had marriage redefined for them – along with Wisconsin.
All in all this means that 15 conservative states where marriage laws protected natural, one man one woman marriage by a vote of the people have now had those laws wiped out by a single judge. That fact should trouble ever freedom loving American that believes our Constitution stands as a barrier to such radical activism.
For news regarding the decision in Indiana you can click here. For news on what is happening in Wisconsin you can click here. For news on what is happening in Utah you can click here.
The Institution of Marriage Should Not Exist! Who Said It?
Posted on July 9, 2014 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
In the effort to redefine marriage there is a concerted effort to present homosexual couples as similar, if not exactly like heterosexual couples. They are committed, loving, couples that like to watch movies, golf, and host dinner parties. This is far less reality and far more campaign strategy intended to create an emotional narrative that will lure unsuspecting people into support for marriage redefinition.
A recent article at Slate, of all places, highlights the fact that gay couples are not nearly as monogamous as heterosexual couples.
“A long Gawker story last week explored this problem in greater detail. In the fight for marriage equality, the gay rights movement has put forth couples that look like straight ones, together forever, loyal, sharing assets. But what no one wants to talk about is that they don’t necessarily represent the norm: The Gay Couples Study out of San Francisco State University—which, in following over 500 gay couples over many years is the largest on-going study of its kind—has found that about half of all couples have sex with someone other than their partner, with their partner knowing.”
Believe in Traditional Marriage – Go to Reeducation Camp!
Posted on July 8, 2014 in Religious Freedom, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
Do you think only women get pregnant?
Believe marriage is the union of a man and woman?
Hold the position that there are inherent differences between men and women?
You old-fashioned, homophobic, bigoted, discriminatory, sexist person. How dare you believe such things.
How dare you believe that only women can get pregnant. Never-mind the biology, it is absolutely sexist and gender-biased of you to think that only women can get pregnant.
And to think that marriage is the union of only a man and woman. I can’t believe any sane, rational, fair-minded person in this day and age would believe such nonsense.
And don’t get me started on gender distinctions. Anyone believing that the genders are inherently different is a product of their discriminatory environment, not an enlightened culture.
How the Transgender Will Redefine Gender, Marriage, Parents, and Family
Posted on July 7, 2014 in Family, Marriage, Religious Freedom, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
This is the second part of a two-part post. Read part 1 here.
A recent article by TIME magazine gleefully advocates for transgender people and their “struggle” to be accepted. Sharing the story of Cassidy, the first openly transgender Homecoming Queen in the U.S., the TIME article (and video) eagerly exposes people to another world full of confusion.
At one point Cassidy says she “came out” to her parents as a gay man in high school, but now lives as transgender. Yet Cassidy said it was in 5th grade that “she” first acknowledged and knew “she” was transgender. The amount of sexual confusion here is astounding to me. This is a young man that has been confused for a long time and rather than seeking any kind of help he is being encouraged in his confusion by others.
Speaking of confusion, an article at The Federalist details the extreme confusion of a female named Tracey transitioning to male:
Hobby Lobby Roundup: Statements Regarding the Momentous Supreme Court Decision
Posted on July 4, 2014 in Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
This is a collection of articles for numerous sources commenting on the landmark decision by the Supreme Court in the Hobby Lobby case against the Obama administration HHS mandate.
My Twitter Conversation About Transgender Rights Being More Important than Christian Rights.
Posted on July 3, 2014 in Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
I had a friendly conversation with a LGBT rights group on Twitter that said the religious convictions of Christian should be protected. As you can imagine, I was a little shocked. Seldom have I encountered any LGBT activist that believes religious convictions are important, much less that they should be protected.
The person I was communicating with said as long as people have sincerely held religious convictions and not just personal opinions, those convictions should be protected. I had a little trouble understanding the difference, but, okay, we were basically on the same page.
Or so I thought.
Wanting to dig a little deeper I asked a very simple question: “You would then condemn the court’s decision against the photographer in New Mexico who refused to render services to a homosexual couple for the fact that it would violate her religious convictions, right?”
That’s where things went south.
Two European Cases Hold Critical Implications for American Christians and Churches
Posted on July 2, 2014 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
Let me ask a question: how many times have homosexual advocates promised to respect religious liberty and religious freedom as they simultaneously demand “equality” and “rights”?
Activists and lawmakers alike have said religious freedom would be respected as homosexuals continue to push for LGBT rights. Pundits sneer at the idea that churches would be forced to perform gay weddings against their religious convictions. And yet such events are taking place.
Let me ask another question: if the government can force people, organizations and businesses to violate their religious convictions why can’t it force churches to do the same?
Victory for Freedom and Life Delivered by The Supreme Court
Posted on June 30, 2014 in Life by Nathan Cherry
In what will be known as one of the biggest, most influential decisions the Supreme Court has made in the last decade, the court ruled that the government CANNOT force business owners to pay for drugs or devices that can cause an abortion. The HHS mandate, put in place by the Obama administration, demanded that all business owners provide contraception, birth control, and abortion drugs to their employers. Many business owners, seeking to live by their religious convictions against abortion, opposed the mandate. The Obama administration refused to give exemptions to these owners. Many have sued and won in lower courts, all such cases led to the Supreme Court case.
In the high court case both Hobby Lobby, owner by the Green family, and Conestoga Wood Specialties, owned by the Hahn family, argued that the mandate was unconstitutional and violated their first amendment rights to religious freedom. The case was closely watched as the implications would have devastating consequences on religious freedom in America.
But today, as we prepare to celebrate the 4th of July, a day of freedom, the court has ruled that religious freedom is still alive and the government cannot force people to violate their religious convictions.
Truly this is a victory for freedom and the unborn, and yet another crushing defeat for the Obama administration by the Supreme Court.
A press release from Alliance Defending Freedom carries comments by ADF senior counsel David Cortman and Conestoga president and CEO Anthony Hahn regarding the landmark victory: