Tumblr Theology

I have seen this post - and scrolled right past this post - too many times. I really can't take it anymore.

So I'm going to break it down and do some theological work here, and maybe it'll start a discussion about what the Bible really says about homosexuality and the Law.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First, let's address that lovely meme at the top.

"I would like to read to you what Jesus said about homosexuality.... I'd like to, but He never said anything about it!"

.......... Is this a thing we really have to go over? The deity of Christ? Really??

Jesus Christ is God, so anything God says about homosexuality, Jesus says about it.

Christ's deity is one of the foundational doctrines of the Christian faith, and should be central to every Christian's understanding of God. We shouldn't even have to address this, but - just for the sake of being thorough - let's give an overview of the biblical proof for this doctrine. I'll try to be brief.


John 1:1 -
"In the beginning was the Word (Jesus) and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

How do we know "The Word" is referring to Jesus? Look at John 1:14.

"The word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."
(side note, in Genesis, when we see God literally speaking all of creation into existence, that was Jesus. John 1:2-3 and Colossians 1:16 - "Through Him all things were made, and without Him nothing was made that has been made." Jesus at work, all the way back in Genesis. Super cool stuff.)

We also have Revelation 19:13 referring to Jesus as the Word.

Other verses that speak of Christ's deity include John 8:58 where Christ claims to be "I Am" (see Genesis 3), and the Jews want to stone Him for it. John 10:30, Jesus says, "I and the Father are one" - a clear claim of divinity.  

(continued: Titus 2:13, Colossians 2:9, John 10:38, John 10:28, Isaiah 9:6, 2 Peter 1:1, Philippians 2:6-8, Romans 9:5, Colossians 1:15, John 17:5, etc.)

SO, to review:
1. Jesus is God.
2. God says homosexual acts are sinful.
3. Therefore, Jesus says homosexual acts are sinful.

Good? Okay, now for the text.

1. "The laws in the Old Testament were set forth by God 

as rules the Hebrews needed to follow in order to be righteous, 

to atone for the sin of Adam and Eve, and to be able to get into Heaven."

- That's not biblical. At all.
The OT law was given so that we would know the difference between sin and God's righteousness, and so we would understand how broken and sinful we are, and how much we need a savior.

Paul says in Romans 7:7, "if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”"
Romans 3:20, "With the law comes knowledge of sin."

Augustine wrote, “The law orders, that we, after attempting to do what is ordered, and so feeling our weakness under the law, may learn to implore the help of grace.”
In other words, the law is the bad news, so we can understand and desire the Good News of Jesus Christ and His death on the Cross.


We're also told that following the law can't save us, or allow us to "get into Heaven". Just look at Galatians 3:21, Galatians 2:16, Galatians 3:11, and Romans 3:20. If that's not enough, look at Ephesians 2:8-9, and James 2:10.

And, even if someone were able to keep the whole law (which is completely impossible), it's not just sinful acts that condemn us, but our sin nature. 1 Corinthians 15:22  and Romans 5:12 say it pretty plainly; "in Adam all die" and, "sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men-"

We're condemned from the moment of conception by Adam's sin, which corrupted all of creation.  Also see Romans 8:8, Romans 7:14-21 (one of my favorite passages in all of scripture tbh. It understands the human condition so well. Actually all of Romans is pure gold tbh. Buuuut I digress....)

As far as "atoning for the sin of Adam and Eve", I have no idea where that concept came from, but it didn't come from the Bible. Ezekiel 18:20, Deuteronomy 24:16, and Jeremiah 31:30 all speak to the fact that people are held responsible for their own actions. Nothing we can do can atone for the sin of Adam and rid us from it's curse. If there was some way we could do that, then we wouldn't have needed Jesus.

2. "That's also why they were required to make sacrifices, because it was a part of the 

appeasement for original sin."

- I could write a short novel on the sacrificial system, but I'll try to be brief. Firstly, I should say that the entire OT points to Christ. The sacrificial system is no exception. The sacrificial laws, and the covenant point forward to Christ as the Lamb of God - the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice.

Secondly, I will say that sacrifices were to atone for the specific sin of an individual, (or in some cases, the nation as a whole) by way of substitution, since, "there is no forgiveness of sin without the shedding of blood" (Leviticus 17:11 and Hebrews 19:22). Again, if sacrifices could get rid of the stain of original sin, we wouldn't have needed Christ.

Now, if you look at the law, there are all kinds of conditions, specifications, and "if-then" scenarios laid out for how the Israelites were to go about this, but that was just an example.
(there's also a fascinating tidbit I could mention about the priests laying their hands on the animal's head to symbolize the transferring of guilt, and so much I could say about the layout of the temple/tabernacle in the OT and how it mirrors Christ's ministry and the gospel later on, buuuut, I digress again....)

3."His (Christ) sacrifices was supposed to be the ultimate act that 

would free us from the former laws and regulations and allow us 

to enter Heaven by acting in his image."

- NOOOO.

First, Christ came to atone for the sin of His people.
Romans 3:25-26, Luke 19:10, 1 Timothy 1:15, John 3:16-17, Mark 10:45 really couldn't make it any clearer.... also,  John 18:37, Mark 1:38, John 10:10, and 1 John 3:8, Romans 8:1-3.

Second, in Matthew 5:17, Jesus Himself says, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
.... not really sure what else could be said about that either. Jesus said it. He's not getting rid of the law.

And finally, we absolutely DO NOT get into Heaven by "acting in His image". That's works based salvation, and it's utterly false. Even the best of men's righteousness is as "filthy rags" before God (Isaiah 64:6).
Look at Ephesians 2:8 - salvation is a GIFT. It's not earned.
In Luke 18:9-14, Jesus tells a parable about those who rely on their works to make them right before God, verse those who ask for mercy. (spoiler alert; it doesn't turn out well for the guys leaning on their "righteousness")
See also Philippians 3:9, Romans 3:28, Romans 4:1-5, Titus 3:4-5, Romans 5:9, 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, 1 Peter 2:24, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Romans 5:1, John 3:16, and I could go on, but I'll stop there.

4. "That's why Christians don't have to circumcise their sons,

 that is why they don't have to perform animal sacrifice, 

or grow out their forelocks, or follow any of the other laws of Leviticus."

- Sorry, wrong again. The OT law of Moses was given to a certain group of people, during a certain period of time, in a certain context - specifically, the Israelites, in ancient Israel, surrounded by pagan nations.

Also, we should distinguish between the different kinds of laws that were given - namely:
1. The Ceremonial law (dealing with how the Israelites were to relate to and worship God),
2. The Civil Law (dealing with how the Israelites were to live with one another, and among the nations around them),
3. and the Moral Law (reveals the nature and will of God for His followers to please Him).


What's the difference between these different kinds of laws? Why do these distinctions matter? Let's talk about that.

a.) The Ceremonial law was all about sacrifices, ceremonies (duh), and the conduct of the priests. It was full of symbols and pictures of things that don't get explained until the NT (like I mentioned earlier). The whole point was to, well, POINT us to the coming Messiah - that is, Christ. Therefore, after Christ, these laws were no longer needed. They had fulfilled their purpose.

b.) The Civil law was all about how the Israelites should live their daily lives. It shows how legal disputes are to be settled, and how crimes are to be punished. God gave this law so that His people would be set apart from the nations around them, and so they would know how to treat one another fairly, and with justice. These were specifically for ancient Israelites, and (since we're not ancient Israelites) they don't apply to us today.

c.) The Moral law is what we usually think of first when we think of the OT law. It's the ten commandments, and other such laws that have to do with God laying out the difference between good and evil. These are God's eternal standard of holiness and righteousness, and since God never changes, these never change either. Christians today should still strive to obey these laws - not because our obedience saves us - but because we love God, and want to obey Him. These laws show us the character of God, and how we can live in accordance with that character.

So, what's important to see here is that the entirety of the law matters - but not all of it still applies. Every law serves a purpose - whether that be to show us something about Christ, or reveal sin within us, or to show us the proper way to live in submission to God - but not all of those laws are still to be held as mandates for Christian living today.

5. "When you quote Leviticus as God's law and say they are rules we must follow 

because they are what God or Jesus wants us to do, what you are really 

saying, as a Christian, is that Christ's sacrifices on the cross was 

invalid. He died in vain because you believe we are still 

beholden to the old laws. That is what you, a self-professed good Christian 

are saying to your God and His Son, that their plan for your salvation 

wasn't good enough for you."

- Wrong again. 

I think it's obvious by now that whoever wrote this clearly has no understanding of what the Gospel is. They do not understand Christ's atonement, or the law, or God's holiness.

First, God is unchanging. Therefore, God's standard of morality is also unchanging.
Hebrews 13:8, Maliachi 3:6, James 1:17, Numbers 23:19, Isaiah 40:8, Psalm 102:25-27, Psalm 33:11, Matthew 5:18, etc.

Second, Christ's death could not have been in vain, because God can not fail.
Isaiah 55:11, Joshua 21:45, Isaiah 46:10, Psalm 135:5-6, and Psalm 115:3.

And third, by holding fast to the word of God, and following His standards instead of letting the world twist my morality, the only thing I am saying to God and His Son, is "not my will, but yours." Isn't it better to follow God, than to follow men?
Proverbs 9:10, Acts 5:29, Matthew 10:28, and Luke 12:4-5.

7. "So maybe actually read the thing before you start quoting it, 

because the implications of your actions go a lot deeper than you think."

- That's one of the most arrogantly hypocritical statements I think I've ever heard. If you, dear author, had "actually read the thing", you wouldn't have made this post in the first place. Please be sure your hermeneutic is solid before you start preaching your views like you know what you're talking about.

8 "This is a theological point that doesn't come up often enough"

- No my friend, this is false teaching, and it's far too prevalent.
Please stop.

Please. Stop.

------------------------------------------------------

The moral of the story? Study the word, know God, know who we are.

God is holy and righteous, mankind is sinful and deeply depraved. But Christ took our place, and died in order that we might be righteous in God's sight. If we turn to Him, confess our sins, and place our trust in His work on the cross, we will be saved.
There is no sin that God can't redeem someone from - homosexuality fully included.

1 John 1:9 - "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness."
Romans 8:1 - "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus."

--------------------------------------------------

For more, here are some other resources:

Jesus never said anything about homosexuality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAOCjKqzAKk

The law's use and application for Christians today:
https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/which-laws-apply/
https://www.ligonier.org/blog/should-christians-obey-old-testament-law/
https://www.ligonier.org/blog/threefold-use-law/
https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/what-value-is-the-old-testament-to-the-christian-life
https://heidelblog.net/2010/03/the-three-uses-of-the-law/

Christianity, the Bible, and homosexuality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUNyUwK17Nc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2nPRV8dmOk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n078cvLw8I

(Matt Chandler sermons and Q&A session on homosexuality)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeC1utI3hvc&t=7s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBU_ipVQ6tM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f26pbVhvA9w


Emily Thomes testimony: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9xU54I3Uak&t=84s
Jackie Hill Perry testimony: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKZNstmc9Qg

The Law and Christ

A friend of mine posted a rather misinformed article on Facebook a while back talking about Christ and Old Testament law - specifically the parts of the law dealing with slavery and the treatment of women as property.

(if you care to read the whole thing, you can find it here - http://churchandstate.org.uk/2016/04/no-jesus-did-not-soften-the-old-testament-in-fact-he-did-the-opposite/ though I would encourage you to not dignify it with any more views than it already has...)

To quote a bit from the beginning of the article:

"Moderate Christians love to talk about how Jesus fixed the Old Testament, or, in other words, obsoleted the horribly offensive parts about slavery, keeping women in their place, killing gays, etc. In fact, he did no such thing. I’ll be doing two things here: 

1. Show you that Jesus fully supported everything in the Old Testament 

2. Show you exactly how horrible that is."

The main problem with the article was the author's horribly twisted interpenetration of scripture.

He (the author) used passages like Matthew 5:18-19, Luke 16:17, Matthew 5:17, and John 7:19 as evidence that Christ is an advocate for slavery, murder and all kinds of other things Christ was most definitely not an advocate for.

Speaking specifically about Matthew 5:17, I'd like to set a few things straight.
------

Looking back at the original Greek passage, I want to first verify that that the word we translate as "fulfill" is indeed the right word and that we’re not misunderstanding because of a mistake or difference in translation. The Greek word used is πληρῶσαι ("plēroō") and it is indeed translated “to fulfill, to make full, to fill up, or to complete".  

So, with that out of the way, I'd next like to get some definitions straight. Several definitions of the word “fulfill” are:
“To meet the requirements of"
“to do what is required by (something, such as a promise or a contract)”
“to measure up to”


When Christ says that He came to “fulfill” the law then, we can understand it as “He came to measure up to the law”.


The OT law is the measure of God’s perfect holiness. God says if you keep the law in it’s entirety, you are holy.

But none of us can keep the law. Only God himself is perfect. It’s not possible for sinful human beings to keep the law perfectly and never break it. The standard is impossibly high.

“As it is written, ‘There is no one righteous, not even one;’” - Romans 3:10


The sacrificial laws in the time of Moses were set in place to atone for sin. Lambs, goats, bulls, etc. were to be chosen very carefully. They were to be “without blemish” (Exodus 12:5)... as close to ‘perfection’ as possible.

“In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” - Hebrews 9:22

This is because,

“For the wages of sin is death...” - Romans 6:23a


But none of the sacrificial animals /were/ perfect. Imperfect sacrifice = imperfect and incomplete atonement. The animal sacrifice was a temporary fix for a very permanent problem.

This is why Christ came. When it says Christ came to “fulfill the law”, it is speaking to the fact that he lived a perfect and sinless life. He “measured up” and “met the requirements” of the law. When he submitted to the crucifixion, he became our atoning sacrifice. And because he was perfect (because he lived up to the standard of the law), he was a perfect sacrifice. Perfect sacrifice = perfect and complete atonement.


“... but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” - Romans 6:23b

The purpose of the law is to show us our need for a savior. We can’t measure up to God’s holiness on our own. That’s why Christ came. Christ measured up, then became that shed blood (from Hebrews 9:22) that provides that forgiveness, that atonement. Therefore when it says that he didn’t come to abolish it, he came to fulfill it, what he’s saying is that the law still stands. To take two more verses quoted by that article -

“It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” — Luke 16:17

“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” — Matthew 5:18-19


The law didn’t change. God’s standards hasn’t been lowered. Christ basically says, “God still demands perfection. You can’t do that, so I’m here to do it for you.”

Matthew 5:18-19 is a warning against teaching that God’s standard has been lowered, because it hasn’t. The law stands. That’s what God requires, for all time.

-----

So yes, Christ does support the OT law. (Now, we could get into why we don't still follow dietary laws and such, but the differences between the kinds of laws prescribed in the OT and how we apply the law today is a topic for another day). 
Christ met the law's requirements. He "fulfilled" it.

As Christians today, we're under a different covenant - specifically, the "New" covenant. We're not bound by the old laws (the Sinaitic covenant given to Israel), but by Christ's law, the law of Grace. (1 Corinthians 9:20, 21)

Your Feelings are Stupid and Irrelevant.

While lurking on a post between several strangers discussing whether or not homosexuality is a sin (I don't honestly know why that's even a question, but that's a whole other can of worms...), I came across this little gem:

"Ok, I like that even better than what I was taught. He(God) loves her no matter who she is, and I hope she didn't change herself to fit someone else's views on what is correct."


I'll just give you a minute to let that sink in. Go back and read it a second time. Go ahead. I'll wait.


First off - REALLY? You did not just say "I like that better than what I was taught". No way you just said that.

That is NOT how this works! We don't get to pick and choose, or make up our own version of "truth" just because we like it and it makes us feel good. God is who He is and your feelings have ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THAT.

We are broken, sinful, imperfect human beings and He is a holy God. His truth is the ONLY truth, whether or not if offends you.

Your feelings are stupid and irreverent in the face of God's perfect holiness, and to call yourself "Christian", and then just ignore the parts of the Bible you don't agree with is a blatant lie.


You are lying to yourself, and everyone around you. I firmly believe there is no room in heaven for those who claim to follow Christ, and then turn a blind eye to the parts of his teaching that offend them. Either you are for Christ, or you are against Him, and all these self-proclaimed "Christians" need to make up their minds. 


Revelation 3:15-16 says that, “I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth."


And secondly, what facts do you have to back up this new "belief" of yours? 
Did you research any of that? Did you look at the text? Did you question it? Do you even Bible?!
And for that matter, what exactly were you taught? Did you question that? Did you think about it, study it? Or did you just accept it just because it sounded good?

I see so many people today who want to call themselves "Christian", and believe whatever they want about God, sin, forgiveness, and hell. 
They want the love of God without the wrath. They want the Jesus who says "love your enemies" and not the one who said, "I have not come to bring peace, but a sword."

They want the "do not judge" part of the Bible, while they completely ignore that nasty "the wages of sin is death" bit. 

You can't have one without the other. It's simply not possible


So be a Christian or don't, but please - please - stop claiming to be a follower of Christ and then living half-heartedly. You're giving those of us who are truly trying to live lives devoted to Him a bad name.

Faith and Works

I've had several people thank me recently for my brutally honest and probably offensive Facebook posts, shared articles, and bold truth claims, regardless of what society says is acceptable. 
I've been praised for my "bravery" and willingness to "stand up for what I believe", and encouraged to continue preaching the truth, no matter how unpopular that truth may be.

And I appreciate that. I appreciate people letting me know that they support me. I'm glad to know that someone approves of my shameless disregard for political correctness on social media.

We're called to be ambassadors for Christ, and if that means "preaching" the offensive truth on Facebook, then that's what I'll continue to do.


But please, don't thank me for what I post online. If you must thank me for something, thank me for how I live. 
What good are my words if that's all they are? I can say whatever I want online, but if - when faced with opposition face-to-face - my resolve crumbles, then not only is my Facebook status pronounced null and void, but it proves me to be a hypocrite and a liar, and worse than if I'd said nothing at all.

It's easy to be brave and bold from behind a keyboard, to promote beliefs you have no base for (and sound very confident while doing so), or to make potentially offensive statements fearlessly, knowing that a digital medium lets you avoid all that messy, face-to-face conflict. 

Anyone can post truth statements on social media. But to live the words, to get behind your beliefs and defend them in the real world, is something else entirely. 


So please, continue liking my posts and appreciating what I say on Facebook. But before you praise my words, make sure I'm backing them up with my life. Make sure I'm living what I'm preaching, and call me out when I'm not. 

I don't promise to be perfect, or anything close to it. But I do promise to try and not only preach God's word with my words, but with my life as well. 


---
James 2:14-15, 20 - "What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?..... Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless?"

A realization

As I have spent the last few days thinking about this blog, and what I'd like to write about herein, I've come to realize that I'm not the writer that I thought I was.

I write fantasy, sci-fi, historical fiction, and free verse poetry. But I realized today that I don't write anything... real. 

I had a blog for several years. I think I wrote a total of twenty-one posts, but only actually published maybe fifteen. Of those fifteen, I am actually happy with no more than two.

I love to write. Anything and everything, I want to write about it all. What I see, hear, taste, feel, think. I would love to be able to put all my everyday experiences into words on a page.

The only problem is, I'm not good at writing about real things.

With fiction prose, the focus isn't on me. The focus is on the characters, the story, the setting, the mood. On fictional things.

But I don't know how to write my own story. When it comes to writing something 'real', I simply don't know what to say. I suppose I just don't know how to express myself.

I know on an intellectual level what to say. I know all the right things to say.
The formula is there, all the equations calculated correctly. All the pieces are in place.
I should talk about what I saw, what I heard, what I tasted. Talk about how it all made me feel.

This is where I get tripped up. 

I have all the right answers, but it still comes out flat and empty. I don't know how to put myself into my work.

Talking or writing about the way I feel has never been something I've been very good at. 
After all, how am I supposed to express to you what I'm feeling, when I haven't even figured it out for myself yet?

A friend once told me that I am simultaneously one of the most open, and most reserved people he's ever met. It seemed a very odd thing to say, but after considering it a while, I realized that it was completely true. 

I am very open about what I think. I know what I believe, I know why I believe it, and I have facts and evidence to back it up. I enjoy thinking, discussing, debating. I love a mental workout. I love having my beliefs and principles challenged. Picking apart opinions and ideas with logic and reasoning is my idea of fun. I question everything, and then I question my questions. 
I could talk about what I think, know, and believe all day long.

The opposite is true when you ask me how I feel. It's not that I don't want to tell you. Most of the time I simply don't know how I feel.
Perhaps it's that I haven't had time to think about it yet. Maybe I have, and I don't yet know what to make of all the information I've gathered. Or maybe I know what I feel, I just don't know how to say it.

So I'm going to apologize now, reader.

I'm sorry that what I write here may lack the... for want of a better word - impact, that the rest of my prose might have. Fiction is where I'm comfortable. Fiction is where I know what works.

But here? Here, I... I'm a bit out of my element. 

My hope is that, with time and practice, I'll be able to adapt to this new style, and present you with something that's - if not eloquent - at least intelligible.   

An introduction... kind of...

I've never been very good at introducing myself, so I'm not even going to bother doing so here.

Besides, chances are that if you're reading this, you're probably related to me. I don't expect this blog to reach internet fame much beyond my rather small circle of family and friends.

So forget the introduction. 


What can you expect to see here? The title should have told you. This blog will have several functions.

- First, simply as a place for me to jot down my thoughts; a catalog of musings, observations, and opinions from yours truly.

- Second, it will act as a sort of literary scrapbook. A record of my life's adventures - whether those be simple day-to-day activities, or more ambitious outings like the month long road trip I'm planning for this summer (more on that sometime later).

- And lastly, this blog is my journal: a battered and water stained notebook with wrinkled and dogeared pages yellowed with age. At least, that's what I imagine it would look like were it a physical thing. It would also likely be filled with illegible chicken scratch. As such, let us all take a moment to be thankful for the wonder of digital media and it's blessed uniformity. 


So welcome. Welcome to a collection of scattered writings on a variety of topics so broad, I don't dare try and list or define them all here. I guess we'll just have to discover them as they come.