"Yes for Love": Declared on the Cross 2,000 Years Ago

Australia conducted a postal survey on the issue of same-sex marriage, where voters were asked by post, "Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?" Out of around 16 million eligible Australians, 79.5% participated in the survey. 

On 15 November 2017, the results were announced. 61.6% voted "Yes", while 38.4% voted "No". The vote was decisively in favour of changing the law to recognise same-sex marriages.

"Yes" campaigners immediately celebrated the vote for same-sex marriage. Various public figures and celebrities lauded the vote, and numerous businesses launched their own celebrations of the results. 

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, in his speech on the results, said: "Australians voted for marriage equality. They voted Yes for fairness, they voted Yes for commitment, they voted Yes for love. And now it is up to us, here in the Parliament of Australia to get on with it, to get on with the job the Australian people have tasked us to do and get this done, this year, before Christmas — that must be our commitment."

If one looks into the Gospels, one would see that the contrast could not be more stark.

In the quiet testimony of Scripture, the Bible tells a very different story of love. 

On a cross between two criminals, hangs the Son of Man on a dark and gloomy day crying out in a loud voice and pleading His Father for forgiveness over those who, in their ignorance, hung Him there (Luke 23:34).

It is the story of a man giving Himself up for His beloved to make her holy and blameless (Ephesians 5:25-27). The Bridegroom for His Bride. A man and a woman.

And with His final cry, "It is finished" (John 19:30), that man Jesus Christ declared a resounding "Yes" for fairness, "Yes" for commitment, and "Yes" for love. 

It was done. He did what the Father had tasked Him to do. That was His commitment.

For it is through this that God shows Himself to be not only just, but the one who justifies. He is the one who commits to us His entire being, even to the point of death, and promises an eternity with Him. He is the God who demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8)

The message of the cross, therefore, tells of a gift that no human being, authority or institution can ever give. It is a perfect gift that can only come from above.

The message of the cross tells of that "Yes" and "Amen" to fairness, commitment and love that had been decisively spoken, not by the voice of any mere human being, but by the voice of God 2,000 years ago. 

While those who support same-sex marriage and who celebrate the "Yes" vote in Australia may rise in momentary triumphalism, on Calvary's hill 2,000 years ago stood the quiet testimony of Jesus Christ and His cross. It is the story of a man who gave of Himself to redeem His beloved Bride. It is the story of a King who rose from the grave, will return to wed His faithful Bride, will reign forever in victory, and whose kingdom shall have no end.

The festivities will fade, but the world needs to hear, as it had always needed, this same story of the Bridegroom and His Bride. And it is our sacred duty to proclaim it till He returns. That must be our commitment.

Is Isaiah Welcome in Singapore?

Truly you are a God who hides himself,
O God and Savior of Israel.
All the makers of idols will be put to shame and disgraced;
they will go off in disgrace together.
But Israel will be saved by the Lord
with an everlasting salvation;
you will never be put to shame or disgraced
to ages everlasting.

(Isaiah 45:15-17)

The Ministry of Manpower (MOM), in consultation with the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), has rejected recent Miscellaneous Work Pass (MWP) applications for two foreign Christian preachers to speak in Singapore. In a statement released by MHA on 8 September 2017, it was said that "both preachers had made denigrating and inflammatory comments of other religions."

 

MHA said in its statement:

3         One of the preachers had described Allah as "a false god", asked for prayers for those "held captive in the darkness of Islam", and referred to Buddhists as "Tohuw people" (a Hebrew word for "lost, lifeless, confused and spiritually barren" individuals) who can be saved only by converting to Christianity.  The other preacher had variously referred to "the evils of Islam" and "the malevolent nature of Islam and Mohammed", and called Islam "not a religion of peace", "an incredibly confused religion", interested in "world domination" and "a religion based on… adhering to uncompromising and cruel laws often focused on warfare and virtual slavery".   

 

In a letter to member churches dated 11 September 2017, the National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS) took the opportunity to advise member churches "to exercise due diligence and careful discernment when inviting foreign guest preachers to minister in their congregations". It added that this was to "preserve the harmonious religious environment that currently exists in our nation, which allows Christians to fulfil their dual role of seeking the welfare of the city and sharing the good news based on our faith."

 

The letter continued:

In a multi-religious society with a secular government, the norms of engagement that make for peace and a nation's well-being require that all the different faiths be responsible in the freedom each has been given to practice and propagate their respective beliefs. In keeping with this, the language of discourse when relating to other faiths must always be respectful and winsome. Our speech should always be "gracious and seasoned with salt" (Col 4:6). The preaching and teaching over pulpits must exemplify and be consistent with this. We are not to denigrate another religion or act in ways that jeopardize the religious harmony in our society. This harmony is both rare and precious in times marked not only be a heightening of contention between nations but also contention within a nation itself.

It is without a doubt that our call as Christians is to speak the truth in love. In a verse cited also by NCCS in its letter, the Bible teaches us "in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect" (1 Peter 3:15).

However, the question comes at the level of application. In this, let us consider one "foreign preacher", the prophet Isaiah.

Isaiah was the son of Amoz, who prophesied during the reigns of the kings of Judah Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah. Some of these kings were righteous, while some were not.

Many would be familiar with his messianic prophecy, "he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him" (Isaiah 53:5), a verse quoted in Matthew 8:17.

Nevertheless, his prophecies not only spoke of the Messiah and the salvation of Israel, but also condemned the wickedness and idolatry around him.
 

In Isaiah 44, the prophet Isaiah criticised idols and those who make them. "All who make idols are nothing, and the things they treasure are worthless," Isaiah speaks on behalf of the Lord, "Those who would speak up for them are blind; they are ignorant, to their shame." (Isaiah 44:9)

 

Isaiah tells of a man who uses half of his wood to make a fire over which to bake bread, and the other half to fashion an idol for worship:

From the rest he makes a god, his idol;

he bows down to it and worships,

He prays to it and says,

"Save me; you are my god."

They know nothing, they understand nothing;

their eyes are plastered over so they cannot see,

and their minds closed so they cannot understand.  

(Isaiah 44:17-18)

Later on, Isaiah issues a call to the "fugitives from the nations", calling them to gather and assemble, and to acknowledge the God of Israel as the one true God. Speaking on behalf of the Lord, he declares, "and there is no God apart from me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none but me." (Isaiah 45:21b)

 

One would struggle to distinguish the substance and tone of language in Isaiah's prophecies from the statements of the two Christian preachers that had been complained of by the Singapore Government, which leaves us with some questions.

 

Would Isaiah be accused of "denigrating" the religions of others or jeopardising religious harmony?

 

Going by the standards of the Singapore Government, would this "foreign preacher" Isaiah be welcome in Singapore, if he applied for an MWP?

In the Beginning was the Tao...

If you are shocked by the title of this post, you are probably experiencing the same shock I felt when I read John 1:1 in Chinese one morning during my quiet time.

In the Chinese translation of John 1, the Greek word logos (λόγος), which is translated the "Word" in English, is translated "道" (dào in pinyin, or the anglicised "Tao") in Chinese.

Thus, John 1:1 reads:

太初有道，道与神同在，道就是神 。

In the beginning was the Tao, and the Tao was with God, and the Tao was God.

The word "道" has multiple meanings in Chinese. It could refer to a way (such as a road or path or a method of doing things), or a doctrine or principle. Many would be familiar with the use of the term Tao in Taoism. 

Logos (λόγος), in Greek philosophy and theology, refers to the divine reason implicit in the cosmos, ordering it and giving it form and meaning. This is the term that John used to refer to Jesus Christ, as the logos.

The depth and complexity of the term Tao truly illuminates who Jesus Christ is. Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life." (“我就是道路、真理、生命。”) (John 14:6a)

Jesus is the 'Logos' or the 'Tao' of God. He is not just the overarching principle of the cosmos, but the way to live and the way to eternal life.

Why the "Jesus" of "Fight of Gods" is not the Jesus of the Bible

I was more than slightly amused when I saw the trailer of a video game titled "Fight of Gods" on YouTube, my attention having been drawn to it by a recent report on Channel NewsAsia ("Malaysia blocks 'Fight of Gods' video game for threatening religious, racial harmony" (9 September 2017)).

 

Published by PQube Games, the game is described as follows on the Steam store:

Your prayers have been answered! For the first time ever, gods, holy spirits and mythological characters from around the globe and throughout history will clash in an explosive 2D fighter where the entire world is at stake!

The characters in the video game include Moses, Zeus, Odin, Jesus and Buddha, engaging in one-on-one fights much like the Street Fighter series of games.

 

As can be seen from the trailer of the game, the "Jesus" character makes his entry by breaking free and coming down from the cross, and using the chunks of wood still nailed/strapped to his hands as weapons or shields in the fight. The trailer tells us that he is the "Son of God", and that "He's back, and he's cross." (pun certainly intended)

 

"Jesus" breaks free of the cross

(From the trailer of "Fight of Gods")

 

Communication and Multimedia Minister Salleh Said Keruak reportedly said that the game degraded religions and religious leaders and posed a huge threat to racial unity and harmony. Steam was initially blocked from access after being given a 24-hour ultimatum to disable downloads of the game by users in Malaysia. But after Steam disabled downloads this morning (9 September 2017), the block on the website was lifted.

 

All that aside, it is quite evident that the "Jesus" of "Fight of Gods" is not the Jesus of the Bible.

 

Firstly, Jesus did not (and would not) come down from the cross. The Gospel of Matthew records how Jesus was taunted at His crucifixion:

Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, "You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! Come down from the cross, if you are the Son of God!"  

In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him. "He saved others," they said, "but he can't save himself! He's the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, 'I am the Son of God.'"  

(Matthew 27:39-43) 

Despite the fact that Jesus could have easily called for "more than twelve legions of angels" to his aid (Matthew 26:53) and despite the taunts and the challenges to His identity, Jesus submitted to the Father's will to die a cruel death on the cross, so as to save the world.

 

Sam Allberry puts it well in his book, Lifted: Experiencing the Resurrection Life:

And yet there is a double irony at work here. For it transpires that he won't save himself because he is the Saviour. His crucifixion was to be the means by which he did save others. Had he chosen to save himself, he would have been no Saviour to anybody else.

 

Secondly, Jesus does not advance His kingdom through violence, but through the preaching of the Word. From the very beginning of His ministry, Jesus' message was "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near." (Matthew 4:17) Before Pilate, He said, "My kingdom if not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews..." (John 18:36) Thus, when Peter sought to prevent Jesus' arrest by the Jews, Jesus rebuked him that "all who draw the sword will die by the sword." (Matthew 26:42)

 

Thirdly, when Jesus comes back, He will not be coming on a cross, but on a cloud (Acts 1:11). Paul writes about the second coming in 1 Thessalonians 4:16:

For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.

And the Book of Revelation shows us instead a picture of Jesus riding on a white horse, with justice to judge and make war (Revelation 19:11).

 

A final point to make is about the premise of the "Fight of Gods" game itself. The game is premised on the false idea that all these are gods who occupy the same universe and are in a battle against one another, and that Jesus is simply one of these gods. On this, the Bible is unequivocal that "there is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men..." (1 Timothy 2:5)

 

Though there is a spiritual battle "against the forces of evil in the heavenly realms" (Ephesians 6:12), Jesus had already disarmed, made a public spectacle and triumphed over the principalities and powers by the cross (Colossians 2:15). And when Jesus encountered demons and evil spirits, even a legion of demons found themselves begging Jesus for mercy (Mark 5:1-20).

 

Thus, the "Jesus" of "Fight of Gods" is not Jesus Christ at all. Such a "Jesus" who forsakes the cross and lives by the sword can save no one (perhaps not even himself), but will instead perish by the sword.

 

The real Jesus Christ was crucified, died and was buried, and rose again to life to reconcile all things to Himself, triumphing over the dominion of darkness, saving us from sin and the grave, and the world is much better for it.

"It's none of your business"

"When you and I as children of God are living in the light of honest confession - we're not trying to keep things under wraps, we're not trying to live a double life, we just want to honour Him in the best way that we can - your failures are not met with God's anger, they are met with God's advocacy."  

- Nik Godshall

 

The above quote was from a message by Nik Godshall titled "Why All the Rules", which he preached at Times Square Church on 6 August 2017.

 

To illustrate the point, he recounted the following story:

Just not too long ago, my son was playing with a bunch of other toddlers. And when toddlers engage in fellowship, dangerous things can happen, especially when my boy is there. Because my boy is a stereotypical boy. He is aggressive, as anything. I don't know what to do with him sometimes.

He likes to hit. He breaks things and everything. He's a lot of fun; don't get me wrong. I love him so much, he's the joy of my heart. I mean, he's excited, he hits. He's happy to see me, he hits. He gets angry, he hits. And he hit a child, which he knows that's wrong. Well, he hit them twice.

And so I had to make good on my previous threat, and so we needed to go deal with the situation. We left the room, and we dealt with it, and it was a very tearful dealing; for him, not for me. And we came back, and I was going to let him resume playtime. And he didn't want to. He just wanted me to hold him.

So I'm holding him on my lap and I'm just comforting, telling, you know, "It's okay, buddy. Daddy loves you. That's why we don't hit. We have to be kind..."

All of a sudden one of the kids from the group came up. They were a little older, and they started asking me some questions about my son. And, they were making me upset, and I had to keep telling myself, "This is an underdeveloped human. This is an underdeveloped human. This is an underdeveloped human. Children are not rational." Just everything.

They had this smirk on their face. They knew what just happened, and they said, "Why is he crying? When you took him in the other room, what happened? Why is he crying?"

And in that moment, I'm thinking, "This is so perverse. What's wrong with you, child?" You know...

And I remembered a line from a book that I had read to my son only a few nights before. We want to make him a bookworm, so we're feeding into that now. We go to the library; we bring home like a dozen books and we just read one every night. We read a Bible story; he gets to pick a storybook.

That night, we had read a book by Max Lucado; it was a collection of children's stories that he had written. And the first one, a really beautiful... basically a poem from a Daddy to his daughter. And I remember one of the lines. He is telling her about what it means to be her Daddy and what she can expect from him. And one of the lines made me stop. I'm reading to him and it made me stop and think, that is amazing. It is where he tells her, "I will always be on your side." And I thought, wow, what a line about parenthood.

My son is only two, and he's got a whole life of rebellion and folly ahead of him. And sometimes I think, what's he going to get into? What am I going to have to deal with someday? And just thinking about that in terms of that line "I will always be on your side."

I remembered that. I'm holding my little boy. I just had to punish him because he disobeyed me. He hurt another person. I had to deal with him because I want him to grow up to be a good person. I want him to be a good man. I want him to be a better man than his Daddy when he grows up. So I've got to be consistent. I've got to do that.

And then this innocent accuser, if you will, comes. And in that moment I remembered that line, I'm always on his side.

I made intense eye contact with this child. And I said, "It's none of your business."

And they walked away.

Stock photo

 

Certainly, human experiences of fatherhood pale in comparison to the love of the Heavenly Father. Yet, even in our imperfection and despite the evil within us, Jesus recognised and affirmed the natural human instinct of fathers to give "good gifts" to their children (Matthew 7:11). 

 

And this account remains a beautiful illustration of God's discipline as well as protection over His children.

 

The Bible shows us that all children of God are under God's discipline. God as a loving Father disciplines us for our good so that we may share in His holiness, even though such discipline may be quite unpleasant and painful for the time being (Hebrews 12:11).

 

However, in the face of the accuser, God is our advocate and defender. We have an advocate in Jesus Christ who speaks to the Father in our defence (1 John 2:1). And in Romans 8:33-34, Paul writes:

Who will bring any charges against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died - more than that, who was raised to life - is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. 

If God declares us righteous, who can condemn us?

 

All our sins have been paid at the cross, and there is no charge that anyone in heaven or on earth or from the pits of hell can bring against the children of God.

 

So, even as the evil one may come and bring accusations against the children of God, God as a loving Father stands as our protector, looks him plainly in the eye, and tells him, "It's none of your business."

"The Message" Author Eugene Peterson's Retraction of Same-sex Marriage Support: Where do we go from here?

Eugene Peterson is the author of "The Message" paraphrase of the Bible, who recently stirred controversy due to his support of same-sex marriage, which he retracted one day later.

 

 

Interview and retraction

In an interview with Jonathan Merritt of Religion News Service published on 12 July 2017, "Best-selling author Eugene Peterson changes his mind on gay marriage", Peterson stated that he would perform a same-sex wedding ceremony.

 

After recounting experiences with "several women who were lesbians" in churches where he was associate pastor, and the employment of man who applied and was employed as a music director that identified as being gay, he added:

I wouldn’t have said this 20 years ago, but now I know a lot of people who are gay and lesbian and they seem to have as good a spiritual life as I do. I think that kind of debate about lesbians and gays might be over. People who disapprove of it, they’ll probably just go to another church. So we’re in a transition and I think it’s a transition for the best, for the good. I don’t think it’s something that you can parade, but it’s not a right or wrong thing as far as I’m concerned.

 

Meritt asked Peterson as a follow-up, "If you were pastoring today and a gay couple in your church who were Christians of good faith asked you to perform their same-sex wedding ceremony, is that something you would do?" Peterson replied with a one-word answer, "Yes."

 

A day after the publication of the interview with Merritt, Peterson retracted his views, stating, "To clarify, I affirm a biblical view of marriage: one man to one woman. I affirm a biblical view of everything."

 

Peterson said, "I’ve never performed a same-sex wedding. I’ve never been asked and, frankly, I hope I never am asked."

 

He apparently blamed Merritt for asking the question in a hypothetical, and then claimed that he was "put on the spot" by Merritt: "When put on the spot by this particular interviewer, I said yes in the moment. But on further reflection and prayer, I would like to retract that. That’s not something I would do out of respect to the congregation, the larger church body, and the historic biblical Christian view and teaching on marriage. That said, I would still love such a couple as their pastor. They’d be welcome at my table, along with everybody else."

 

"I regret the confusion and bombast that this interview has fostered," he said. "It has never been my intention to participate in the kind of lightless heat that such abstract, hypothetical comments and conversations generate."

 

Merritt responded to Peterson's allegations, that his questions were pointed, "as any serious journalist’s should be. They were respectful and in no way pushy." He added, "It is possible Peterson felt he had been placed on the spot and offered an answer that doesn’t reflect his true conviction. But it is also important to note that in the week prior to the publication, there was no attempt to clarify or change his answer to these questions." ("Eugene Peterson backtracks on same-sex marriage", 13 July 2017)

 

Was Peterson's retraction genuine?

In thinking about Peterson's position on same-sex relationships, I have found Russell Moore's reflection on World Vision's 2014 change of course on same-sex marriage quite instructive.

 

For one, I find that Peterson's claim that he was "put on the spot" by Merritt to be an irresponsible act of blaming another person for his own error (if he does truly believe it to be an error), in an act of self-justification, quite similar to many of the public (partial) apologies that we see these days. It is part of the sinful human condition.

 

We have seen such examples in the Bible. Adam infamously pointed the finger at "the woman [God] put here with [him]" when God confronted him about his sin (Genesis 3:12). When Moses confronted Aaron about the golden calf, Aaron blamed the people instead, "You know how prone these people are to evil." (Exodus 32:22)

 

Secondly, in his response, Merritt suggested that Peterson retracted his views due to pressure from "conservatives":

The condemnations from conservatives were swift. LifeWay, America’s largest Christian book chain, threatened to ban his books if he didn’t affirm a traditional view of marriage. The heat rose quickly, and then Peterson retracted his remarks, claiming he was put on the spot. While he said a same-sex couple would be welcome in his church today, he would not perform a same-sex wedding “out of respect to the congregation, the larger church body, and the historic biblical Christian view and teaching.”

I find there to be quite some merit to this view (no pun intended). 

 

Despite Peterson claiming to affirm a "biblical view of marriage" and a "biblical view of everything", this seems to be based less on the authority of the Bible per se, but out of mere deference to "the congregation, the larger church body, and the historic biblical Christian view and teaching".

 

Entire congregations can fall into error, the larger church body can be mistaken, and Christian view and teaching however historic or historical are no substitutes for the actual Word of God. As Christians, we are taught to obey God rather than man (Acts 5:29). Quite regardless of whatever people may say, our conscience and duty are owed to God, and God alone.

 

It would follow that, if God approved of or is neutral towards same-sex relationships or marriage, Christians ought to stand for these regardless of what people think. The same is true otherwise. And on this point, the Bible is amply clear in its affirmation of marriage between a man and a woman, and disapproval of all other forms of sexual behaviours outside that union, including homosexual behaviour.

 

Unfortunately, therefore, Peterson's retraction does not appear to be a genuine, Biblically-based retraction, but one made out of mere deference to the wider Christian body at large.

 

Where do we go from here?

Peterson's departure from the truth of marriage probably began way before the interview, and this interview was merely a symptom or a culmination of that earlier departure. (See Jonathan Merritt's article on "Eugene Peterson had this to say about same-sex issues in 2014", 13 July 2017)

 

It is important to recognise that Church (not just any denomination or congregation, but the wider body of Christ) is meant to be a place of accountability. Leaders and ministers are not exempt. Indeed, those who teach will be judged more strictly (James 3:1).

 

Russell Moore's reflections on World Vision’s change of course in 2014 are equally applicable here:

We need to watch and to hold every Christian organization and ministry accountable. That’s what the Bereans did when they judged everything that the apostles were saying according to the word of God. They searched the scriptures to see if these things were so. We need to do that all of the time because every human authority is fallible, and every human authority can make mistakes. And so we need to be constantly watching that.

 

Especially on issues as controversial as sexuality in our modern age, we may find not just many churchgoers, but also pastors, leaders and ministers being swayed by the spirit of this age to fall into error. On this, James' exhorts us:

My brothers, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring him back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save him from death and cover over a multitude of sins. (James 5:19-20)

 

Since Peterson's retraction was apparently made merely out of deference to the wider Christian body at large, it would be an error to merely take his retraction at face value and assume that he has turned from error. To do so, would merely enforce conformity with doctrine without genuine conversion to a Biblically-centred faith or, worse, the fear of man rather than God. 

 

It would also be wrong to accept his self-justification and blaming of his interviewer for putting him in a spot, since such denial of personal responsibility stands in the way of true faith and repentance.

 

Instead, the wider Body of Christ should actively reach out to Peterson to bring him back not only to a sound Biblical understanding of marriage, sexuality and human nature, but also and ultimately, a renewed relationship with the Creator Himself.

Gospel Witness in an Age of Outrage

In the lead up to, during and after the recent Pink Dot event that has been taking place annually at Hong Lim Park around this time of the year, I found a good number of Christians around me reacting with sheer outrage.

 

There were many reasons for their outrage, much of which was quite understandable. They were outraged at the fact that some people who professed to be Christians supported Pink Dot and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) movement. They were outraged that people, groups and companies had been enlisted or characterised (sometimes falsely) as supporting Pink Dot. They were outraged at the fact that other people who professed to be Christians were utterly indifferent or nonchalant about Pink Dot as well as its supporters. They were outraged at Pink Dot itself.

 

This reminded me of a 2015 message by Russell Moore, titled "Marriage On The Line - Preparing Your Church For A Same-Sex Marriage Culture", where he recounted an incident which he witnessed during the US Supreme Court arguments over same-sex marriage:

I was walking around the corner the day of the Supreme Court arguments over same-sex marriage. On my way there to be at the Supreme Court, as I was coming around the corner from my office, I heard somebody on a bullhorn yelling angrily. And I immediately turned to some friends who were with me and said, "Please don't let that be one of us."

And as I came around the corner, I saw someone standing there with Bible verses on placards and with the bullhorn screaming at the protesters on the other side and the people who were gathered on the other side. This person was yelling, "You're condemned. You're self-condemned. You're going to hell."

And as he was yelling this through the bullhorn a group of men dressed as Catholic nuns with all sorts of garish makeup calling themselves the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" were dancing along in front laughing about the message that's coming over the bullhorn.

And I winced when I heard this man on the bullhorn acting as though he were speaking for Jesus Christ, saying, "You're going to go to hell and don't expect me to cry for you when you do."

That is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

But we live in a world right now in all of the fractures that are going on, especially around issues of sexuality, where it seems so often in many of our communities and neighborhoods that we have the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" versus the "Brothers of Perpetual Outrage".  

And yet we have been called to be a people of the Gospel. And we have been called to be a people of both truth and grace, of both conviction and kindness, in a world that is often fearful and angry.

 

In an issue as controversial and politicised as sexuality in our modern times, it is easy to lose sight of what we are ultimately warring against. It is tempting to see only the political agenda and thereby perceive the activists or their supporters as enemies, or to see only the behaviours of the people involved and see them as villains. 

 

But Paul reminds us in his letter to the Ephesians that "our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms" (Ephesians 6:12).

 

The real battle, then, is spiritual in nature. It is a war against sin. And our weapons are not carnal.

 

The victory, as a result, is neither necessarily political nor necessarily moral; these are only consequences or outflows of the real victory. The real victory is when sin and death are conquered, and the sinner is restored to life. It is a victory already won at the cross of Jesus Christ.

 

The call is a call to the Gospel, a call to faith and repentance, a call to leave a life of sin and follow Jesus Christ. And the Bible teaches that it is God's kindness that leads us to repentance (Romans 2:4). It is not a "kindness" that turns a blind eye to sin or distorts the truth. Indeed, even as Paul wrote that "love is kind" and "is not easily angered", he also wrote that love "does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth" (1 Corinthians 13:6).

 

Certainly, there is room for righteous anger, as Jesus displayed most vividly when He cleared the Temple (John 2:12-22). But James the earthly brother of our Lord also warned that "man's anger des not bring about the righteous life that God desires" (James 1:20). The difference lies in being outraged at the right things. Just as the peddlers were corrupting the Temple by making it a marketplace, it is sin that corrupts every human heart, for Jesus said:

"For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly." (Mark 7:21-22)

 

The Gospel witness is a gentle witness, a ministry of reconciliation seeking ultimately the reconciliation of all things to God in Jesus Christ. It is not a witness that blares out with bullhorns, much less one that seeks in anger to condemn others to hell, but one which is "quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry" (James 1:19). In an age of outrage, it is our kindness that will ultimately point people to the place where love won: the cross of Jesus Christ.

 



The Primal Cry of “Abba! Father!”

Many Christians would be familiar with the passage in Paul's epistle to the Romans, where he wrote to the church, "For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!”" (Romans 8:15, ESV)

 

One of the best illustrations of the meaning of the primal cry of "Abba! Father!" I have heard to-date comes from a message preached by Russell Moore, "Primal Scream Theology: The Call and Response of the Abba Cry", originally preached on Sunday, 3 May 2009, at Highview Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky, where Moore recounts part the story of the adoption of his two sons from a Russian orphanage:

[The] creepiest sound I ever heard in my life was nothing at all.

My wife Maria and I were walking into a Russian orphanage on the first of two trips to the former Soviet Union to meet two boys to whom we had been directed to adopt as our sons.

We'd never seen them; we didn't know all that much about them, but when we walked into the doors of that orphanage, the thing that struck us right away was not the stench, although it was overpowering; I had to resist the urge to walk outside and vomit. It wasn't the squalor of the walls cracking apart and the dilapidated building although that was awful.  

The thing that struck me right away was the silence.

I said to Maria, "Will you just listen for a minute?"

The place is completely still and quiet and there are babies everywhere. As you walked up and down the halls of that orphanage, room after room after room of toddlers and infants, but there was not a cry. It was almost like the Christmas carol that we sing, "all is calm, all is bright", no crying any of them made.

And it slowly dawned on me that what had happened was that you have an institution full of babies without mothers, without fathers, who are learning that when they cry, no one is going to respond. And so a baby learns if he is hungry or distressed or alarmed, that when he cries out, when she calls out, if that happens enough, they will stop crying.

And so all that you heard in this orphanage is the sound of cribs rocking and hitting against the walls as infants comforted themselves in cradles.

And every day, for a week, my wife and I would walk into a room where we found these two little Russian boys. And every day we would play with them and read with them and tell them - even though they couldn't understand us - that we would come to get them and they would be our children soon. And every day we would leave, and we would leave to silence.  

Until the last day of that trip.

Maria and I were told, "It's time for you to go, you're going to have to leave these boys behind, and you're going to have to go back to the United States and you'll have to wait for all the paperwork to be done, and you're going to have to leave now."

We said, "Can we have five more minutes with these boys?"

They said, "You can have five more minutes."

And we hugged on them and we kissed them, and I said, "We will not leave you as orphans. We will come to you." And we walked out of the door.

And as soon as we walked out of the door, one of those little one-year-old boys - little Maxim, whose name now is Benjamin - fell face-first into that crib filled with excrement and screamed.

It was the most beautiful sound I have ever heard.  

Not because of his agony, not because of his sense of abandonment, but because in that scream he recognised us as his parents. He knew that we would hear.

That is exactly what the Apostle Paul says is happening in the life of the believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, when through the Holy Spirit you cry out "Abba! Father!"

 

This is our primal cry to God when we cry out "Abba! Father!" It is a cry with the knowledge that we have a God who will hear us. As the Psalmist writes, speaking from God's perspective, "He will call upon me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble, I will deliver him and honour him." (Psalm 91:15)

 

This is the spirit of adoption, the spirit of sonship, that we receive through God's beloved Son, Jesus Christ.

Strength to be who He truly wants us to be

Something interesting caught my eye in the papers today. It was an article about Cassandra Thng, a transgender woman, which the Sunday Times says it means "she identifies with a gender different from the one she was born as". In other words, Cassandra Thng is biologically male, but identifies as female.

 

Cassandra Thng held a sign which said "I am trans. Will you take a photo with me?" at the shopping belt from Bugis to Orchard, seeking to raise awareness on the Transgender Day of Visibility from 5.30pm to 10pm on 31 March 2017.

 

 

(From Cassandra Thng's Facebook page)

 

The Sunday Times reports in "Hostile stares and friendly words on the streets" (16 April 2017):

But while Ms Thng did receive some hostile stares, she also found support on the streets. 

"The most interesting thing that night... was three Christian girls asking to say a prayer for me - and they prayed that I may have the strength to be myself, and have the labels not put on me by God to be cast off. 

"I really experienced the kind of extremes that faith can bring people to that night," she said.  

"I could not have asked for things to go better."

 

The account of the three Christian girls is indeed beautiful and fitting especially in light of this weekend with Good Friday and Resurrection Sunday as we remember the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Assuming the account is correct, I'd affirm their prayer with a firm "amen".

 

Yet, I believe that Cassandra may not have understood the thrust of the prayer made by the three Christian girls.

 

Indeed, in God's eyes, we are created "male and female" in His image (Genesis 1:27). Likewise, Jesus taught that "at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female'" (Matthew 19:4).

 

From God's perspective, every single human being has inherent worth and dignity as His image-bearer. Our biological sex is not an accident of nature nor a social construct, but is of divine design. Male and female are made complementary, equal but different. Who we truly are is truly who we are in Him. 

 

No matter what labels that society may place on us or what labels we may place on ourselves, what truly matters is how God sees us.

 

Every human being is an integrated unity of heart, soul, mind and body (cf. Mark 12:30). Our bodies are not our enemies or our prisons, and we are not trapped in the wrong body.

 

I once prayed for a number of transgendered persons at the red light district in Singapore. My prayers were very similar to what the three Christian girls prayed for Cassandra Thng. In my prayers for them, I prayed that God would reveal Himself to them and show them who they truly are in Him, and that they would have the courage to be who He wants them to be.

 

There is no denying that people who identify as transgender feel strongly that their bodies are not part of who they are.

 

But as Jesus died to reconcile to God all things by making peace through His blood shed on the cross (Colossians 1:20), my prayer is that Christ's ministry of reconciliation can be brought to everyone, to reconcile everyone to God and give us strength to be who He truly wants us to be - His sons and daughters. And may every label that does not come from God be cast off.

Sex is a gift, but no substitute for the Giver

At the 2014 Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) National Conference on "The Gospel, Homosexuality, and the Future of Marriage", Sam Allberry spoke on the topic "Is God Anti-Gay? Answering Tough Questions About Same-Sex Marriage".

In his message, he addressed four "biggest ground-level questions" that are commonly raised:

1. Did Jesus even mention homosexuality?
2. Can't we just agree to differ over this issue as Evangelicals?
3. Isn't a same-sex partnership okay if it's faithful?
4. Isn't the kind of traditional Christian position on sex and marriage deeply harmful to people?

The responses given by Allberry on these questions are deeply insightful. Given that he is himself same-sex attracted and has been for "pretty much [his] entire adult life", his sharing is not purely theoretical, but practical as well, sharing his personal experiences in the issues and questions.

The final question that Sam Allberry addressed was: "Isn't the traditional Christian position on sex and marriage harmful?" This is the objection that says that the traditional Christian position is the cause of acute mental health problems even suicide among gay people.

As part of his response to this objection, Allberry hit the nail in the head on the allegation that the Christian position was driving same-sex attracted people to commit suicide:

Next thing to say on this issue; on my understanding and in my experience, we Evangelicals are not the ones who say sex is everything. We are not the ones who say that a life without sex is no life at all.  

And the idea that, the assumption behind that, the kind of challenge that celibacy is in itself harmful means that sex has become an idol. If life without sex is not conceivable for you, it is very clear what is really 'god' in your life.

A friend of mine Andrew Wilson back in the UK once a recently spoke on the issue of "Why does God care who I sleep with?" And a part of his answer was to turn the question around and say, "Why do you care so much who you sleep with? Why is that where you draw the line and object to following God? Why is that your one non-negotiable?"

It strikes me that it is our culture that is making sex into an idol, and therefore is saying to people when your sex life doesn't work out your life hasn't worked out. It is not the Evangelical Church but our society around us that is putting the stakes up that high.

And my question is, which perspective is most likely to make someone feel that their life is not worth living: the perspective that says sex is everything and if it's not fulfilling then there's no point - life without sex is no life at all? Or the Christian perspective that should be saying sex is a wonderful gift from God, but it is but a gift and is no substitute for the Giver?

We are not the ones who say that a lack of sexual fulfilment is a lack of human fulfilment. So friends, I don't deny that the church has been the cause of ungodly and unwarranted pain and abuse for people over the years and we should not be slow to confess that and to repent of it. But I want to challenge the culture around us to say, I think it has blood on its hands as well, in making sex the centre.

This is certainly the unfortunate result of the Sexual Revolution and the culture wars of our modern times. It is not exclusively limited to homosexuality, but certainly does include it.

 

With the message on the one hand from the sex-driven culture that sexual relations are a core part of one's identity or an integral part of human fulfilment, and the Christian message that the only acceptable form of sexual expression is in the context of marriage between a man and a woman on the other, it is no stretch of imagination how this may lead those struggling with their sexual desires (same-sex or otherwise) to feel sandwiched between two impossible alternatives, thus leading to despair.

Taken together, these two messages present a same-sex attracted person with the (false) dilemma of either embracing one's "identity" and being "true to oneself" by giving in to one's sexual desires or of following God's commands and therefore denying one's "identity" and thereby giving up perceived human fulfilment in this lifetime.

How should the Church respond then?

Despite how political or theological debates are often about whether homosexuality is right or wrong, acceptable or otherwise, the real issue at its core is a concept of identity.

Modern culture attempts to define human identity based on one's sexuality, thereby defining people as either "gay" or "straight", "homosexual" or "heterosexual", or some other form of "gender identity" or "sexual orientation". Perhaps even some Christians may be tempted to adopt these definitions and labels.

However, this is not how God defines or sees us as human beings. The Bible teaches us that our identity comes from being made in the image of God, male and female (Genesis 1:27). If one is a Christian, one's identity comes from being a child of God and, through the Spirit, we are able to call out as children to God, "Abba Father" (Galatians 4:6).

As Sam Allberry said earlier in the same message, "my same-sex attraction is not who I am. It's part of what I feel, but it's not who I am."

Indeed, in Christ, our identity comes from being the children of God. Like Jesus at His baptism, God looks down upon all who are in Christ, and what He said to Jesus He says also to us, "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased." (Luke 3:22)

And as children, we are able to look to God for every good gift that the Father intends to give us, be it the gift of marriage or singleness, just like any other good gift that the Father deems fit to give His children.

At all times, it is worth remembering that sex remains a gift, but is no substitute for the Giver, from whom all good things come.