Christians are currently involved in a titanic struggle. Our whole existence is currently being threatened by a noisy minority who have the ears of our politicians.<\/p>\n
These God-haters, \u00e0 la Psalm two, want to throw off every semblance of God, His Son, Jesus Christ, and His revealed Law-Word. They are done following the Maker\u2019s commands and they are demanding absolute autonomy for themselves. These are the Secularists complete with their desire for the Secular State<\/em><\/span>.<\/p>\n Consequently, we hear a great deal in regard to the separation of Church and State. We hear that the concept of God is pass\u00e9. We hear that people can freely have and practice their religion. However, there is an explicit quid pro quo<\/em>. We can have our religion (Christianity) as long as it stays a private matter.<\/p>\n Along with Secularism comes its bastard child, Political Correctness<\/em>. This spawn from the pit starts to make even more demands. However, the cleverness of this corrupting child is that it seeks to mask its corruption by feigning equality<\/em>. Thus, one is no longer a \u2018lowly housewife\u2019. One becomes a \u201cdomestic engineer\u201d. Speaking of a former life, I was not a \u201cGarbo\u201d, but a \u201csanitation engineer\u201d.<\/p>\n Insidiously, this spurious mongrel makes people believe that they are being elevated in importance and rank when in actual fact nothing changes. Indeed, in many instances, degradation and regression are deliberately masked.<\/p>\n The last example of the \u201cgarbo\u201d is particularly pertinent, for sanitising<\/em> is exactly what Political Correctness<\/em> sets out achieve. It does this by destroying language, terminology, and meaning. The Secularists use it with great skill in the war that has been unleashed upon our nation. They have been so successful, that they have managed to have a variety of terms introduced into common parlance. More importantly, they have had legislation passed to fortify their position and silence those who would oppose.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n Regrettably, we Christians have been a bit thick. We have been all too eager to jump on this Bastard\u2019s bandwagon and adopt its perversions without engaging our brains or engaging with God\u2019s word<\/span>.<\/p>\n Just as many Christians have given up on the physical discipline of their children for fear of being \u201cdobbed in\u201d, too many Christians have adopted the language of Political Correctness<\/em> in an effort to conform and not stand out.<\/p>\n This acquiescence has only worsened the situation we face. It has made our enemy stronger and it has substantially weakened our cause, the cause of Christ<\/em><\/span>. As a result, we face a very dire time. There is a growing voice of opposition. It is vociferous at times. At times it is an incoherent rant filled with sheer hatred for God and his people.[2]<\/a><\/p>\n However, take heart. All is not lost. First, we serve the Lord Jesus Christ. In case any are in doubt, His job description and title goes something like this \u2013 King of kings and Lord of lords; Prince of peace; Son of God, Mighty God; on whose shoulders rest the Governance of the nations<\/em><\/span>; a King whose Kingdom cannot end; A King who sent His servants to \u201cteach the nations to obey all that He commanded\u201d. In the words of S.M. Lockridge, \u201cYeah, that\u2019s my King!\u201d[3]<\/a><\/p>\n Second, Christians can arm themselves for this battle. It is a battle that must be self-consciously fought in the Name of the King and in His power, but it can be fought and won. Indeed, I would contend that it must be fought and won<\/em>.<\/p>\n Please allow me to outline, in brief, a bit of a battle plan.<\/p>\n 1. Christians must quit the fuzzy thinking<\/span><\/span>. Listening to Christians argue their case, I hear too much baptised humanism<\/em>. In other words, the Christians are arguing with a Secularised worldview rather than with a Biblical worldview.<\/p>\n 2.<\/span> As this is the case, Christians have no effective weaponry. Cotton Mather, speaking of the use of so-called \u2018white\u2019 magic against \u2018black\u2019 magic, remarked that such an enterprise was \u201cto use the devil\u2019s shield against the devil\u2019s sword\u201d. It was an endeavour of futility.<\/p>\n 3.<\/span> Consequently, Christians need to arm themselves with the \u201cSword of the Spirit\u201d and the \u201cmind of Christ\u201d. What is meant by this is that we must use the Biblical weaponry, but that, equally, we use our minds and the wisdom God gives through Christ Jesus.[4]<\/a><\/p>\n When these simple points are brought together, the Christian must realise that Jesus Christ did not come to reveal \u201cdoormat theology\u201d or the view that we Christians are to be the poverty stricken whipping boys of all other belief systems. On the contrary, Jesus revealed to us the<\/em> system of life and victory.<\/p>\n By taking our stand in God\u2019s word, we stand upon the immovable Rock that is Jesus Christ. When we clothe ourselves with the mind of Christ, we are able to think God\u2019s thoughts after Him and outthink our opponents. In 1 Corinthians1:20 & 25 we are encouraged with these words: \u201cWhere is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? \u2026 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.<\/span>\u201d<\/p>\n Therefore, let us do everything within our power to take the fight to our opponents by following the Wisdom of God<\/strong><\/span>. \u201cBut How?\u201d you ask. Well, let\u2019s see if we cannot give a few pointers to help you.<\/p>\n A.<\/span> Do not let the enemy set or force the agenda<\/em><\/span>. Too often Christians awake from their sleep just long enough to fight this or that battle. However, when the urgency subsides, the Christian\u2019s hibernation continues. In opposition to this, we need to be awake and on the job 24\/7. We need to be the ones in the politician\u2019s ear giving sound counsel.<\/p>\n At present the battle ground is the issue of homosexual union. However, I do not hear too many arguments against homosexuality, full stop! How did we arrive at this point? Honestly, there are a number of answers. Amongst them, though, are things like Christians being distracted by silver and gold; Christians being more interested in trying to figure out the date and time of Jesus\u2019 Second Coming than \u201cteaching the nations to obey\u201d; and Christians being concerned that their children get a good (State based) education, rather than being concerned that their children receive a Christ<\/em>(ian) education<\/em>.<\/p>\n B.<\/span> Adopt the Christian or Biblical worldview<\/em><\/span>. This is really the critical need of our day. Too many Christians are unable to think Biblically and critically \u2013 the second because they lack the first. Yes, Christians often use the terminology of \u2018believing the Bible\u2019 or \u2018standing on God\u2019s word\u2019, but in reality, very few do.<\/p>\n Let us look at the issue of homosexuality. In a few sentences I will present a \u2018no holds barred\u2019 assessment that will offend many. The offence comes from the fact that we do not hold to a Biblical worldview. In short, we do not view issues from God\u2019s perspective or take God\u2019s statements seriously.<\/p>\n God, in the Bible, calls homosexuals an abomination. God states that their immorality is worthy of death. These are very serious charges. Despite the moderns desire to reinterpret these texts, the simple reality is that God situates homosexuals among that which disgusts Him most. Thus, He decrees that they should die.<\/p>\n No doubt, you will counter with, \u201cOh yes, but that is the Old Testament.\u201d[5]<\/a> So, let us look at the New Testament. In Romans 1:26-27, Paul, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, declares homosexuality to be both the pinnacle of rebellion against God and of God\u2019s judgement against Man. Note, please, Paul is expressing God\u2019s absolute distaste for homosexuals and their practice. Then, in verse 32, Paul speaks of these as \u201cbeing worthy of death\u201d.<\/p>\n In Paul\u2019s argument, there is a complete unity with what God has said in previously in the Law and the Prophets. Yet, modern Christians read over this explicit statement. They re-interpret the term \u201cdeath\u201d as meaning \u2018spiritual death\u2019 or as a euphemism for Hell.<\/p>\n With this reinterpretation complete, the average Christian then speaks of God\u2019s love for the homosexual. They tell us that we are to tolerate these people, even if we do not condone their sin. In the worst cases, we have Christians (??) refusing to even label homosexuality as sin! Yet, the question must be posed, \u201cHow is it, given the Scripture\u2019s unified statements to the effect that God is disgusted with homosexuals and that He decrees that they should be struck from the earth, that Christians come forth with statements that say the exact opposite?\u201d[6]<\/a> How does the Christian sanitise that which God labels disgusting<\/em>?<\/span><\/p>\n Now, many \/ some will not agree with what has been said, but the challenge then is, \u201cDoes your disagreement come from the Biblical dictates of a Biblical worldview or does it originate in the Worldly dictates of the Secularist\u2019s worldview?\u201d<\/p>\n In any case, the point is simple. Modern Christians are, at times, found to be calling good that which God has called evil; they try to tear asunder that which God has brought together or bring together that which God has torn asunder. They do so because a miasma of Biblical illiteracy has descended upon the Church.<\/p>\n C.<\/span> Do not be fooled by the language<\/em><\/span>. As we noted above, the illegitimate offspring of Secularism, Political Correctness<\/em>, seeks to mask evil by changing language. Thus, the Biblical concept of fornication[7]<\/a> is toned down into sleeping together<\/em><\/span>;[8]<\/a> Husband\/wife\/spouse becomes partner<\/em><\/span>; Adultery becomes an affair<\/em><\/span>; Sin\/Evil becomes sickness<\/em><\/span>; Sodomy becomes homosexuality\/gay<\/em><\/span>; Murdering infants becomes pro Choice<\/em><\/span>; Murdering the elderly becomes euthanasia<\/em><\/span>;[9]<\/a> Corporal punishment becomes child abuse<\/em><\/span>; and stating a fact becomes vilification \/ slur<\/em><\/span>.<\/p>\n Secularism also seeks to invent and apply stigmatised labels[10]<\/a> as a weapon in this war. People who will not yield are labelled and through labelling are shamed into capitulating \u2013 you are judgemental; homophobic; intolerant; bigoted<\/em>.[11]<\/a><\/p>\n By adopting this language, Christians give ground. We begin to subtly imbibe the Secularist\u2019s worldview. More importantly, we actually impugn our God. We do this by our abandonment of the Christian worldview, but also by the implicit denial that God gave us morals and terms[12]<\/a> that both encompass and express those morals.<\/p>\n D.<\/span> Do not be fooled by false claims<\/em><\/span>. <\/em>The Secularists will claim that they hold the moral high ground on many issues. However, when light is brought to bear, the Secularist is found to be naked with naught but a smile to hide behind. Hence, he manipulates the situation through language and fortifies his position with legislation. Again, by buying into this practice we actually support and abet the ungodly desires, notions, and goals of the secularist.<\/p>\n This brings us to the heart of the current debate, namely, the obvious hypocrisy and deceit by the Secularists as they push their anti-God agenda.<\/p>\n (For the examples, please read Part 2 of this article<\/a>)<\/p>\n [1]<\/a> We will talk about hypocrisy later, but even here the Secularist is seen to be a hypocrite. He justifies his cause on the basis that God is dictatorial, suggesting words mean a certain thing and that any lack of conformity will be punished. In response, the Secularist demands that words mean nothing \u2013 until he puts meaning into them \u2013 and if you do not conform to this new usage, you will be punished!<\/p>\n<\/div>\n [2]<\/a> See Bill Muehlenberg\u2019s No Tolerance for Dissenters<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n [3]<\/a> http:\/\/thatsmyking.wordpress.com\/2007\/11\/16\/sm-lockeridges-my-king-2007-high-energy-remixed-version\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [4]<\/a> Colossians 2:3.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n [5]<\/a> There is another discussion to be had here in regard to God\u2019s immutability. Those who argue OT v NT are implicitly, if not explicitly, stating that God has changed His moral standing on issues like this. Regrettably, this attitude smacks of a return to the Marcionite heresy.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n [6]<\/a> The counter to this is, of course, the fallacious statement that God loves the sinner but hates the sin<\/em>. Room does not allow for a full discussion, so we will make two points: A. The Bible never, in the judicial sense, separates a man and his sin; B. Why does God send men to hell<\/em> and not just their sin?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n [7]<\/a> For a thought provoking read, see RC Sproul Jr\u2019s, Sexual Destruction<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n [8]<\/a> It is fundamentally important that we grasp the point being made. Search the Scriptures and you will not find a moral imperative that would forbid an unrelated, unmarried couple of the opposite sex from actually sleeping together. The Bible may ask us to be wise because such a situation, if indulged too often or in the wrong circumstances, may lead to that which is forbidden. However, I repeat, the Bible has no moral imperative against two people \u201ccatching some Z\u2019s\u201d together. On the other hand, the Bible does have some strong words and presents a moral imperative against sexual congress outside of marriage. The masking, is at heart, an attempt to destroy God\u2019s moral imperatives by changing the connotation of the act, removing the stigma attached to immorality, and, in essence, removing morality from the action. Hence, we encounter the sanitising effect of Political Correctness.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n [9]<\/a> For those not aware, the term euthanasia<\/strong> literally translates to good death<\/em>. Here, again, the sanitising crew of PC has done their best to wipe the muck off this term and mask the reality. In what sense is this death good<\/em>? What or who is the determiner of a good or a bad death? After all, we are all dying, are we not? So whilst I live, I hasten to die? So at what point and on whose authority does the process of dying converge with the death event? What qualities make this convergence good or bad?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n [10]<\/a> Here, again, hypocrisy comes into view. It is wrong of Christians to stigmatise homosexuals with their Biblical language and moral objections, but it is right and acceptable for the Secularist to stigmatise Christians with their invented language and labels of shame.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n [11]<\/a> This was the same approach used by the Feminists in their war. If you disagreed with them, as a male, you were labelled as a misogynist.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n [12]<\/a> It is important that we understand that terms apply to certain things. We work with this fact<\/em> every day. Yet, as we have shown, the Secularists are keen to destroy these terms when they are detrimental to their agenda. Elsewhere<\/a>, I have addressed this issue with the illustration of a child wrongly naming an animal that he was shown.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Christians are currently involved in a titanic struggle. Our whole existence is currently being threatened by a noisy minority who have the ears of our politicians. These God-haters, \u00e0 la Psalm two, want to throw off every semblance of God, … Continue reading
<\/p>\n
\n