Tag: homosexual
Ga Gov Nathan Deal: Religious Freedom doesn’t Need Protected – No One’s Being Sued Here
Posted on April 12, 2016 in Marriage, Public Policy, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
There’s a verse in the Bible I’m learning to understand more as our culture moves toward complete rebellion of God’s principles. That verse simply states, “you cannot serve God and money.” (Matt. 6:24 ff)
Now, some would say this means you can’t be rich and serve God, but that’s a false conclusion. One look into Scripture reveals many people that were indeed rich and were used of God; King Solomon is just one example. Nope, that verse is teaching that your priorities cannot be both the pursuit of money and the pursuit of God and serving God.
Our society has become driven by money: the pursuit of money, the protection of money, and the acquisition of more money. And when money is threatened it is not a surprise to see people make decisions in favor of money rather than in favor of serving God.
Christians Can Learn a Valuable Lesson from a Gay Man Trying to Enter the NFL
Posted on November 30, 2015 in Sexuality, Theology by Nathan Cherry
The major identifier of any Christian should be our identity in Christ. It’s not about our “conversion story,” or where we are in our “walk of faith.” Creating an identity out of something with no inherent worth or value will always lead to frustration when others don’t place as high a value on that thing as we do.
Take for example the story of Michael Sam, the former NFL draft pick that was also the first openly gay player to be drafted by an NFL team.
Before the combine, before the draft, Michael Sam was a decent football player barely hitting the radar of NFL scouts. Most scouting reports had him listed as a little too small and a bit too slow for his defensive position. But he was nonetheless headed for the NFL combine and would try to make an NFL roster. Then, the relatively unknown player from the mid-west decided to have a press conference to announce that he was gay.
In the world of sports this was only news because there was no openly gay players and Sam would be the first if he could make a roster. For the most part though, NFL scouts, coaches, and owners sort of…yawned. They weren’t looking for a poster-child for social causes or to break new sporting ground. They were looking for talented football players that would help them win championships. Because, at the end of the day, wins is all that matters.
Did You Hear About the Gay People Supporting Christians for Refusing to Take Part in Gay Weddings?
Posted on November 3, 2015 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
When a Christian person refuses service to a gay person it is all over the news. Every news outlet in the country carries the story and wags their head at the “shameful” treatment of the poor gay people. By the end of the day everyone has seen the story and knows the basic details of how this innocent gay person (or couple) has been terribly mistreated by the awful Christian person (or couple).
Instances of overblown media attention include the case of the baker in Colorado that refused to bake a cake for a gay wedding; the florist in Washington that refused to provide flowers for a gay wedding; and the printer that refused to print t-shirts for a gay-pride parade. (Just for good measure let’s throw in the pizza shop that refused to provide pizza for a gay wedding.)
In each of these accounts a Christian business owner is exercising his or her right to live and do business according to their faith. They are refusing to provide service – not because they hate the gay people – but because they do not want to show support for gay marriage, something their faith will not allow.
But, have you ever heard the mainstream media (MSM) report on the large amount of support these Christians received from the gay community for doing business according to their faith?
The Governmental Persecution of the Church Has Begun
Posted on September 29, 2015 in Public Policy, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
If I were to ask you whether churches would ever lose their tax-exempt status (or be sued) for refusing to support homosexuality, what would you say?
Can you imagine a time in our nation when a church would be forced, under penalty of law, to accept something that it believes is sin? That is the question many people are currently wondering. In light of the earlier Supreme Court ruling in the Obergfell case, political analysts are speculating that it is just a matter of time before churches are in one way or another forced to support homosexuality and same-sex “marriage.”
In particular, commentator Bill O’Reilly said he thinks it’s “just a matter of time” before churches are sued for refusing to perform same-sex weddings. In a video after the Supreme Court decision he said:
“It’s just a matter of time before lawsuits are filed against churches and religious organizations, trying to strip them of their tax-exempt status if they don’t toe the line on gay marriage and other progressive causes.”
Let’s be honest here, it has always been religious people that have stood in the way of liberal causes. When you think of the primary opposition to abortion, homosexuality, and other liberal social ideas, it is Christians and those with deeply held religious convictions that stand opposed. For this reason people of faith are a target, an obstacle to be removed in order to achieve some liberal idea of a utopian society.
Why Do Christians Accept Ideas That Are Unbiblical?
Posted on September 8, 2015 in Marriage, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
At one time our Founders sought refuge from government persecution for their religious convictions. They left their homes to establish a place where people could freely live out their faith in every aspect of their life. What is happening today is a return to that same government persecution that our Founders desperately wanted to leave behind.
One area this seems most apparent is in the effort to force Christians to accept homosexuality and same-sex “marriage.” Sure, there may have been a goal of simply seeing this lifestyle legitimized and legalized; but that appears now to have been a precursor for the larger goal of forcing every person to accept and celebrate it. But there can now be no doubt that seeking simple “equality” is a long forgotten idea. And the rhetoric we were fed that “no one would be affected” was nothing more than a well-rehearsed talking point in a carefully crafted campaign.
A statement in an article from a couple months ago echoes what, I believe, many Americans are thinking:
I Can’t Think of One Reason Not to Legalize Polygamy and Polyamory. Can You?
Posted on August 4, 2015 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
I’ve been saying this for years. And not just me, many voices concerned about the fallout of the legalization of same-sex “marriage” have said it.
If the government legalizes same-sex “marriage,” what legal or moral basis would there be to refuse to legalize polygamy or polyamory?
Let’s think logically for a moment. The U.S Supreme Court has found a “right” to same-sex “marriage” in the constitution. Often citing autonomy of adults and their ability to consent, SCOTUS decided that a civil right exists to allow homosexual adults to marry. If that is the case, then what possible moral of legal reasoning could there be to refuse to legalize polygamy and polyamory?
Go ahead, I’ll wait while you think about it.
Oh, you say it’s bad for the kids. I see. So not having a mother or a father – as in the case of same-sex “marriage” is acceptable, but having two or three moms or dads is not? Is that what you’re arguing? Come on, you need to do better than that.
The Supreme Court just ignored every argument for what is best for children and found a civil right for relationships in which kids will be denied one or the other – do you really think they will deny legalization of polygamy on the basis of kids having three moms of two dads? If the court doesn’t think it’s a big deal for a child to have no mom or no dad, they will surely not care if a child has multiple of one parent or another. Try again.
Gay Affirming Christians Must Be Reading a Different Bible – Here’s What Mine Says
Posted on July 22, 2015 in Marriage, Sexuality, Theology by Nathan Cherry
One of the biggest challenges in defending traditional marriage in our current culture doesn’t come from the Supreme Court, LGBT activists, or political agendas. Instead, this challenge comes from self-described “gay-affirming Christians.”
This group believes the Bible has been misinterpreted for hundreds of years and now wants to “set the record straight” on the biblical teaching regarding sexuality. For gay-affirming Christians the issue is understanding the cultural context of passages like Romans 1 in order to properly translate them for our current culture.
One standard talking point for gay-affirming Christians is that Romans chapter 1 is not a prohibition of homosexuality or same-sex “marriage,” but only a prohibition of homosexual fornication and abuse. In other words, Paul is simply saying that as long as homosexuals are given the opportunity to marry, as are heterosexuals, their lifestyle as homosexuals will be as pleasing before God as anyone else.
Not only is this “interpretation” of Romans 1 dangerous, it violates any sensible hermeneutic in studying Scripture. First, it goes against the plain text understanding of the Scripture. There is absolutely no way for any reasonable person to read Romans 1 and walk away with that understanding. The only logical conclusion after reading Romans 1 is that homosexuality is a sin. But even if we study the passage’s meaning from a cultural perspective, or look at the original Greek to get the meaning, we see a consistent message.
Did Justice Kennedy Create Protection for Christians Against Homosexual Attacks?
Posted on July 7, 2015 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
After the Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex “marriage” in all 50 states, the concern for many is how the ruling will affect churches and pastors. One can almost cut the tension with a knife as we await the first headline that a church and/or pastor has refused to perform a same-sex wedding.
What then?
Some say the Supreme Court made it clear that pastors, churches, and all people bound by religious convictions cannot be forced into violating their religious convictions. Justice Kennedy said in his remarks:
“Finally, it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered.”
Christians Don’t Hate – But They Do Have Convictions
Posted on May 27, 2015 in Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
A very significant court ruling was handed down not long ago and I bet you didn’t know anything about it.
The Fayette Circuit Court in Kentucky ruled that a printer did not discriminate by refusing to print a t-shirt for a gay pride parade.
Blaine Adamson owns Hands On Originals. This printing company prints many items, including t-shirts. Not long ago an LGBT pride group came to HOO asking them to print a t-shirt for the upcoming pride rally in Lexington. Adamson refused their request based on his religious convictions and offered to set them up with another local printer for the same price.
The group went elsewhere to get their shirt printed.
But, I’m sure you can guess where this is going, a discrimination suit was filed against HOO and Adamson.
I reported on this incident a while back because of some of the unique aspects to the case. For starters, this is one of a few cases that does not involve someone in the wedding services industry. Most of the cases of “discrimination” we are seeing take place involve photographers, bakers, and florists refusing services for gay weddings. Btu this is a printer being asked to print something for a gay pride parade.
If ever there was a need for protection surely it would be for someone printing actual words. Right? No one would try to force another person to print words that violate his religious and moral convictions, right? Wrong.
The Church is Partially to Blame for Efforts to Redefine Marriage
Posted on May 20, 2015 in Marriage, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
Abigail Rine is a professor of English at George Fox University. Each year she hands out a reading assignment to her gender theory students designed to provoke them. She recently decided to assign the book “What Is Marriage” by noted Princeton professor Robert P. George, Ryan T. Anderson, and Sherif Girgis. The book is a simple explanation of the conjugal view of traditional marriage.
Rine reports that the book, which is a manual of sorts on the traditional view of marriage as it relates to procreation, was offensive to her evangelical students at her evangelical university. Let that sink in for a moment.
But Rine said something that needs to be admitted: the church helped create the effort to redefine marriage.
I don’t mean that the church altered biblical teaching or even advocated marriage redefinition. Certainly some churches have done this but the vast majority of churches today continue to adhere to traditional biblical teaching of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. What I mean is that how the church handled the issue of marriage and sexuality in past decades aided the rise of marriage redefinition efforts.
Rine writes: