Cultural Commentary

The Man on the Wire

/ Marcus Glover / Leave a comment

As you may already be aware, something amazing happened on live television this past Sunday. Nik Wallenda, a seventh-generation member of the legendary Flying Wallendas daredevil family (ask your grandparents?), stunned millions of American viewers by walking on a tightrope across the Grand Canyon live on the Discovery Channel without any kind of safety mechanism.

In case you missed it, here is a clip:

Though I did not watch live as Wallenda crossed the Grand Canyon, I did watch a year ago when he pulled off the same stunt at Niagara Falls live on ABC.

Perhaps most interesting is how Nik Wallenda has appropriated his death-defying high wire adventures as an opportunity to proclaim his faith in Jesus Christ. As Wallenda gingerly made his way across the Grand Canyon, he prayed aloud for safety and repeatedly thanked Jesus for the amazing opportunity and the spectacular views. Immediately before and after the daring feat, Wallenda prayed on camera with his family and exulted in God’s faithfulness. For Nik Wallenda, this was clearly more than a brazen stunt. It was a platform to proclaim the glory of God.

Yet for those of us who have known God’s grace in Jesus Christ and therefore seek to live for the praise of God’s glory, Wallenda’s actions should raise some questions for us. Is Nik Wallenda being faithful or reckless? Should we be celebrating a husband and father who takes such breathtaking risks? Should Wallenda’s story inspire us to do similar things in order to gain an audience for the gospel?

I believe Scripture provides us with at least three broad principles for responding properly to these stunts and learning how to embrace both risk and caution for God’s glory.

1. Rejoice not as the world rejoices.

Firstly, we should be most entranced and captivated by the things of God, not merely the things of the world. The apostle Paul makes this clear when he admonishes the Corinthian church for their inordinate fascination with worldly wisdom and human heroes.

But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast befor God.

– 1 Corinthians 1:27-28

It comes natural to us to be wowed by the things that are impressive by worldly standards. And that’s not always a bad thing. But it is harmful when our enjoyment of worldly feats exceeds or obscures our enjoyment those things which God values. This wrong infatuation with the world is evidently what ailed the Corinthian church, and we are also vulnerable to the same phenomenon. Though we might often protest that our enjoyment of worldly delights is simply an innocent desire to partake in a little harmless fun or entertainment, there is always the danger that our hearts will be swept away by these things.

On the other hand, the things that should impress us most are often the very things which the world most overlooks or even despises. Just consider the fruit of the Spirit outlined in Galatians 5:22-23. On the hierarchy of things to get excited about these must be at the top. Yet for all the practical ways that we would practice these spiritual virtues, we will not often receive notoriety and public praise in the church, let alone in the world at large. Often the most godly among us are those who are quietly and humbly serving, without drawing much attention to themselves at all.

It’s not wrong to be impressed by amazing things that people accomplish in this world. And it is certainly true that our amazement at a spectacle such as Nik Wallenda’s high wire stunt can be redeemed as a broader enjoyment of God’s glory in the way he gifts human beings. But we must be thoughtful and vigilant about it. If there is no conscious thought of God’s glory, then there is probably no worship taking place. And that is always a problem!    (1 Cor. 10:31)

2. Only gospel-driven risks are worthy risks.

Just as our enjoyment of the Wallenda stunt must be motivated by God-centered worship, so also the stunt itself should be motivated by God-centered worship. On the surface, Wallenda’s stunt certainly seems like a faithful act of death-defying worship. After all, it has resulted in millions of people being exposed to the gospel of Jesus Christ. But regardless of the gospel proclamation that has resulted, it is important that we not lose sight of the stunt itself in determining whether or not it was a good, wise thing for Wallenda to do.

On this point, it is helpful for us to consider the fact that Wallenda’s high wire stunt was enormously risky, while having little or no inherent societal value. What I mean is that there was no societal need that necessitated Nik Wallenda crossing the Grand Canyon on a tightrope. Was Wallenda delivering a backpack full of Bibles to an unreached tribe? Was he carrying supplies to build a well in an impoverished village? Was he trying to rescue someone who was stranded on a ridge of the canyon? No. He was simply doing it to prove that he could do it. And in the process, he placed himself and his family in a tremendously risky situation. With one strong gust of wind, Nik Wallenda’s children could be without a father today. And for what purpose? Our entertainment.

Scripture has much to say about exercising wisdom in our lives even as we take risks. Though we suffer, do not do so because of our sin (1 Pt. 1:17). Though we trust God, we do not put him to the test (Matt. 4:6-7). Although Nik Wallenda insists that his daredevil stunt is a testimony of God’s faithfulness to protect him and give him success, we must always remember that God gives us no such promise of material prosperity. Instead, God’s rock-solid promises to his people are for our spiritual prosperity through the atoning death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Thus, Wallenda’s theology in the matter bears some of the classic marks of the so-called “prosperity gospel.” It is fitting, then, that Wallenda was joined at the Grand Canyon by Joel Osteen, the poster boy for this wrong-headed focus on material blessing.

While I certainly cannot pronounce any definitive judgement on Nik Wallenda’s motives, his understanding of God’s faithfulness seems, at best, immature and, at worst, heretical. Though God does certainly bless us even when we do stupid, unwise things, we should not therefore engage in stupid, unwise things. Tempting fate does not give God the glory he is due.

3. Rejoice that Christ is proclaimed.

Okay, I have been rather hard on Nik Wallenda and his legion of fans thus far. But regardless of my deep concerns, I am grateful that it has in fact resulted in the proclaiming of Christ. I agree with the apostle Paul when he says the following:

What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice.

– Philippians 1:18

To be sure, the means by which Christ is being proclaimed could be more helpful. And Nik Wallenda could be more clear and biblically-rooted in his attempts to articulate his faith. Still, at the end of the day, I do take joy in the fact that millions of people heard Christ proclaimed on live television without censorship. And since that is becoming increasingly rare in our society, we should be all the more thankful when it does happen.

While we must be vigilant about theological precision, we must not be cynical. Instead, we must remember that God is powerful and faithful to use even the feeblest, clumsiest efforts of man to bear fruit for his kingdom. Perhaps, when Christ returns and we stand before him in judgment, we will find that Nik Wallenda’s high wire trek across the Grand Canyon resulted in sinners repenting and believing in Christ. Perhaps not. Either way, our hope is that God himself will use his Word to bring himself glory and build his kingdom.

Jason Collins and Chris Broussard: Cultural Symbols in a Polarized Nation

/ Marcus Glover / 2 Comments

I’ve always said that sports reflects culture. If there are certain worldviews and trends that seem pervasive in other sectors of mainstream society—government, media, pop culture—we will usually see them appear in sports as well. Right now, this theory is once again being validated.

On Monday, NBA basketball player Jason Collins announced publicly in a Sports Illustrated article that he considers himself gay. To many people, this was inevitable and long overdue—not that Collins himself would announce he is gay, but that someone currently playing professional sports would make this announcement. After all, the thinking goes, homosexuality is normal and natural. Surely, someone somewhere in a professional sports uniform is silently living as a homosexual, and eventually they will come out. We don’t know who it is, and we don’t really care. We just want someone to do it.

Well, the inevitable has finally happened. His name is Jason Collins.

Yet for all this, there was a second inevitability, dependent on the first. Just as there had to be a hero who had the “courage” to wear his homosexuality on his sleeve, there also had to be a villain who was despicable enough to publicly disagree with and even condemn the hero’s declaration. Well, we have our villain—Chris Broussard.

Following Collins’ announcement yesterday, ESPN basketball analyst Chris Broussard was asked on camera to comment. Why Broussard? Well, the obvious answer is that he is an NBA analyst and this is an NBA story. So it makes sense, right? But it quickly became clear that there was an even more specific reason ESPN chose Chris Broussard—and not, say, Jon Barry—to comment on Collins’ coming out.

You see, Chris Broussard has been very open about the fact that he is an evangelical Christian. That is, Broussard believes the gospel is uniquely true and that the Bible has complete authority. Most importantly, he has turned from willfully sinning and is trusting Jesus Christ alone for forgiveness and reconciliation with God.

So, when Jason Collins announced his homosexual lifestyle, ESPN saw an opportunity that was too good to pass up. On Monday’s edition of ESPN’s Outside The Lines, Broussard was asked to comment on Jason Collins’ claims to be both homosexual and a Christian. And here is how Broussard responded:

It is striking that when confronted with the question of homosexuality, the first words out of Broussard’s mouth are, “I’m a Christian.” He then provides a cogent summary of the Bible’s stance on homosexuality and unrepentant sin in general, noting particularly that the Bible expressly forbids people living in open sin and yet claiming to be Christian. As he makes the biblical case, Broussard registers his own assent to the Bible’s teaching. For Broussard, his stance on the matter is the Bible’s stance. For Christians, it can be no other way.

Not surprisingly, the backlash against Broussard has been sweeping and vitriolic. On Twitter, Broussard has been called almost every derogatory name one could imagine—many of them too heinous for me to repeat. Among his sports journalism peers, Broussard has been ostracized, with many people calling for him to be fined, suspended, or even fired. Indeed, the pervasive “tolerance” movement is once again driving its stake in the ground, just as it has done on so many other matters. And each time, the rhetoric is more extreme, more hateful—more intolerant to the minority who does not share the views of the majority. The irony is deep here.

But what is perhaps most interesting about the Collins-Broussard situation is the position of professional sports as an emblem of progress, or lack thereof, in society as a whole. What is true in sports must be true in society, and vice versa.

To be sure, there are many who desperately reject such a notion. Sports, it is thought by some, is one of the few spheres of public life in which one’s views on matters like race, religion, and sexuality are completely irrelevant. But we know better than this. For as the public debate over same-sex marriage has continued to heat up, there has been an increasing ground swell of people in sports clamoring for a brave soul who will finally break the “sexuality barrier” and become yet another powerful public symbol of America’s inevitable march toward complete normalization and integration of the homosexual lifestyle.

In order to finally achieve our ultimate aims, we need symbols—people, events, or objects that show us and those around us that our cause is authentic, legitimate, and achievable. On April 29, 2013, Jason Collins became that symbol in the realm of sports. The same-sex agenda already has its public symbols in the film, television, and music industries. The political sector has also provided its own share of high-profile symbols.

The only shoe that hadn’t dropped yet was sports. Advocates of same-sex marriage needed a public, high-profile symbol in one of the “big four” sports (i.e. football, basketball, baseball, hockey). And they got it. Make no mistake about it: Jason Collins now stands for something much bigger than himself. For many people in this country, he has become a living, breathing sign post that says same-sex attraction is normal, legitimate, and demanding of full, unqualified acceptance.

If Jason Collins is a symbol, then there is a flip side to that coin. Chris Broussard is also a symbol. When the news of Collins’ announcement became public, ESPN jumped at the opportunity to record a dissenting opinion from within the realm of sports. Why? Because every hero needs a villain to highlight the moral virtue of the hero’s cause. And that’s precisely what has happened. Broussard had barely finished articulating his position before hordes of people took to social media to register their moral outrage. For the mainstream pro-gay agenda, Broussard’s statement was a gift. It has served to further galvanize an ever-increasing consensus in favor of embracing the “tolerant” same-sex agenda.

For Christians, Broussard’s plight is a stark reminder of what we already know. That is, the era of Christian privilege in America has come to an end. We Christians have become a despised minority. It appears we are now entering a period of unprecedented marginalization of evangelicals in this nation. A clear line is being drawn right before our very eyes. More and more, the biblical worldview will be considered categorically incompatible with American ideals. As a result, there will no longer be a place in American public life for those of us who believe in the supreme authority of the Bible and the unique truth and saving power of the gospel.

Thankfully, God’s Word has prepared us to face such opposition:

Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn you name as evil, on account of the Son of Man! Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven; for so their fathers did to the prophets.

– Luke 6:22-23

Though Jesus here was speaking directly to a crowd of Jews in the first century, the lesson applies to us today. Following Christ and opposing unrighteousness will get you hated. And when that happens, remember your heavenly reward and let that be cause for joy. God himself is our great reward, and he is worth all our allegiance, even when it costs us everything in this world.

I applaud Chris Broussard for taking a courageous stand for biblical truth in the midst of vehement opposition. His struggle is our struggle. He is a pronounced symbol for what we will now face every day in every place. Yes, he is a symbol. But what our mainstream society has intended to be a symbol of our defeat, is actually a symbol of our joy-filled suffering in anticipation of the ultimate vindication of our righteous cause.

Resources on Same-Sex Marriage

/ Marcus Glover / Leave a comment

I know. I’m sorry.

When you saw this post come up on your news feed, you probably thought, “Oh no! Not another preachy manifesto on the moral implications of same-sex marriage. Why does everyone with Internet access suddenly think they are the second coming of Frederick Douglass?”

Or perhaps you’re thinking that if you have to see one more red equals sign on Facebook, you might just go ahead and strangle somebody.

If either of the above categories represents how you’re feeling, that’s totally fine. I get it. I’m just about there myself, to be honest. Here’s the good news: I’m not going to add my own two cents—at least not right now. If you are interested in what I have to say, I have already written some of my own thoughts on same-sex marriage here and here.

Though these issues regarding same-sex marriage are important for Christians to understand and wrestle with, there also comes a point where it hits you all at once and you just need a break. So feel free to check out of the discussion for a little bit.

Put on a movie. Go for a walk. Read a book. Learn a language. Live your life and be happy! You don’t need to stay glued to your computer or television screen, worrying yourself silly about what the U.S. Supreme Court will decide. It’s okay to pull the plug for a while. But make sure you come back at some point. You can’t ignore this stuff forever.

For those who are interested in staying engaged right now, allow me to point you to some good resources for helping Christians think well about how to approach the same-sex marriage discussion with compassion, intelligence, and biblical faithfulness. I have read all of these articles this week and have found them helpful in my own thinking and discussions with others. Both of these articles deal with the causes and effects of professed Christians supporting gay marriage. Here they are:

 

Why the Arguments for Gay Marriage are Persuasive

Kevin DeYoung discusses five reasons why the arguments in favor of same-sex marriage are persuasive for many Americans, including young evangelicals.

 

When Did Idolatry Become Compatible with Christianity?

Joe Carter considers explores the current trend of evangelicals supporting same-sex marriage due to an idolatrous allegiance to the American ideal of civil liberty. Essentially, Carter argues that some Christians are in danger of abandoning biblical faithfulness for the sake of protecting the American way.

 

Note: If you are not familiar with The Gospel Coalition, you should be. The Gospel Coalition is a network of Christian thinkers that aims to equip evangelical with resources for thinking well about issues related to gospel ministry, the church, current events, and pop culture. You can check out their online resources here.

 

A Discusion on Religious Liberty

/ Marcus Glover / Leave a comment

With the recent healthcare mandate put into effect by the Obama administration and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), there is a growing concern on the part of many that the American federal government has transgressed constitutional parameters guaranteeing religious liberty. In fact, many believe that the government is on a slippery slope toward obliterating religious liberty altogether.

The concern stems mainly from the provision in the HHS mandate which requires employers to offer their employees healthcare insurance that covers, among other things, abortifacients like the “morning after” pill. Any employer who fails to do so faces a stiff fine of $100 per employee, for each day of non-compliance. Aside from “houses of worship” (i.e. churches, synagogues, mosques, etc.), there is no exemption for religious organizations. That means that any “secular” employer who objects to the healthcare mandate on religious grounds is, well, out of luck.

Capitol Hill Baptist Church (Washington, DC) recently hosted a lecture about the HHS mandate and its implications on religious liberty. The keynote speaker was Kyle Duncan from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. The event also featured a response by Carl Trueman, professor at Westminster Theological Seminary.

Watch the full lecture here:

This is an important discussion about the trajectory of religious liberty in the United States. As we consider what it will look like to live in a civil democratic society with increased religious pluralism, it is vital that Americans grapple with what it means to remain faithful to our own beliefs–as unpopular as they may be in some spheres of society–while always seeking to preserve the freedom and dignity of those who disagree with us.

The Darker Side of Social Media

/ Marcus Glover / Leave a comment

social-media

This month’s issue of ESPN the Magazine features a piece by Chris Jones exploring the impact of social media on those who struggle with depression. In his short yet penetrating article, Jones discusses the recent decision of professional tennis upstart Rebecca Marino to retire early due to her battle with depression. According to Jones, Marino cites not only the depression itself, but also the emotional wounds she suffered at the hands of cruel, unrelenting critics on Facebook and Twitter.

Jones reveals his own battle with depression and his sympathy for Marino’s plight:

“Unless the dark is the only place that feels safe. I’ve also battled depression, and I believe I know what or at least how Marino is thinking. I’ve thought a lot about giving up my job and vanishing — if I’m being honest, I’ve occasionally thought about vanishing in bigger ways too. When I’m in a good place, it seems insane to me that I’ve ever thought that way. My job is a dream job; my life is a dream life. But depression’s worst trick is its powers of distortion. It takes the good and makes it nearly invisible, and it takes the bad and amplifies it. People with depression also have long memories for hurt. Stings linger and layer.”

Jones then explains that his depression has, at times, been exacerbated by vocal critics, including one Twitter user who tweeted that he wished Jones would “eat a shotgun.”

This article is definitely worth a read, because it is a poignant commentary on the effect of the high-opinion, low-accountability, instant-sharing culture that has been created on the Internet, largely as a result of the prominence of social media interaction.

While social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter have made many positive and important contributions to different spheres of communication, commerce, and activism, they have also done their share of damage. Wherever people have the ability to instantly say whatever they want, with little or no accountability for what they say, there is both great opportunity and great peril.

For example, let’s consider Twitter for a moment. For me, one of the greatest benefits of Twitter is the ability to break news stories the moment they happen. In fact, many major news outlets have integrated Twitter into their normal communication strategies, encouraging consumers to tweet their questions, photos, ideas, and suggestions. It is clear that Twitter has revolutionized the way news media outlets do business.

At the same time, however, I cannot count how many “breaking news” tweets I have encountered over the past year that have turned out to be partially or entirely false. In such cases, we are left to grapple with the frustrating reminder that the First Amendment protects not only the distribution of information we find positive and helpful, but also that which is not so helpful, and sometimes even harmful.

Is Rebecca Marino a coward? Some would say so.  But I would suggest that she is the least cowardly of all in this sad narrative. While some would use technology to give full vent to their hatred and bitterness, Marino has had the courage to stare social media in the face–with all its commercial appeal and recreational allure–and disengage. Social media, Marino has decided, will not own her. It will not destroy her.

Contrary to what many of us–myself included–believe, social media is not an inevitable fact of life in a world saturated with instant e-communication. No, Marino has apparently decided that social media–and even her budding tennis career–can be discarded like everything else. Even in the digital age, there is more to life than staying connected.

Marino’s story is a reminder to us that real evil exists in the world, and it originates in the hearts of human beings. As much as we see and experience all the good contributions humans have made in this world–all the progress, all the philanthropy, all the peace initiatives, all the wonderful advances in medical and business technology–we are also faced with the reality that all of us, even the best of us, have within us a darker nature which compels us to do harm. And though we may insist on our good deeds and our honorable intentions–all of which may be true–none of us is immune from this corrupt nature the Bible calls sin.

Just as we see that human beings–made in the image of God and yet corrupt by nature–have a dual capacity for good and evil, we must also understand that the innovations of man likewise have a dual capacity to accomplish much good and much evil.

So what does this suggests about social media platforms? Are they evil in and of themselves? Are they to be avoided, or at least frowned upon, by those who wish to pursue righteousness? No, I do not believe that is the conclusion to be drawn here. Rather, we must grapple with the fact that the true source of evil exists within us. It comes from a heart that rejects the authority of the one true God in order to pursue our own selfish desires. Long before these heart desires reveal themselves in the form of vitriolic tweets or status updates, they grow up in our own hearts.

As such, social media is neither completely benevolent or malevolent. To the contrary, social media is a useful tool that can be abused. As such, the challenge for us is to exercise great care in how we use social media, recognizing that it can indeed become a grotesque platform for our sin.

This concept is not at all foreign to biblical Christianity. In fact, it is foundational to properly understanding the spiritual state of mankind in this world. Jesus himself affirms this in his teaching about what defiles a person:

“There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him…What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

– Mark 7: 15;20-23

Since Jesus is here offering a rebuttal for a false hope of righteousness from ritual purity, that is the primary point of the passage. But it also points to the broader principle that sin and righteousness are always matters of the heart, not merely physical things. Moreover, this world is filled with many things which, being neither inherently good or evil, require us to exercise much wisdom in our use of them.

In short, social media is not the problem. We are the problem.  However, social media–as Rebecca Marino can attest– is a dangerous weapon in the hands of sinners. As such, we cannot afford to partake of social media without reflecting on our own hearts. On a practical level, this could mean something very different for you than for me. But faithfulness to God–and simple human decency–demands that we handle social media with the utmost of care.

A Christian Response to Obamacare

/ Marcus Glover / Leave a comment

Last week, the United States Supreme Court announced its decision to uphold the controversial Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as “Obamacare.”

What is Obamacare? In a nutshell, Obamacare is a healthcare initiative proposed by Obama administration with the broad purpose of providing healthcare to all Americans, regardless of income or medical history. The bill was passed by the U.S. Congress in 2010 and thus became law. Though this certainly appears to be a noble endeavor, Obamacare is a piece of legislation rife with controversy.

To begin with, Obamacare includes an individual mandate for health insurance. In other words, every individual American will be legally required to purchase health insurance by 2014. Anyone who fails to do so will face a monetary penalty, payable to the Internal Revenue Service on their next tax return.

Though President Barack Obama and supportive members of Congress appealed to the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce Clause as a justification for the individual mandate, the Supreme Court struck down that justification, stating that the Obamacare mandate oversteps the authority granted to Congress by the U.S. Constitution. However, the Court did still uphold the individual health insurance mandate, saying that is falls within Congress’ constitutional authority to impose taxes.

A second controversial aspect of the Obamacare legislation consists of a mandate by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that requires all employers—including religious organizations—to provide insurance plans that cover abortion and certain contraceptive drugs that cause chemical abortions after fertilization. Whereas abortion has not previously been covered in most health insurance plans, the U.S. government is now mandating that such coverage be offered by all employers. That includes, with only a few narrow exceptions, all religious organizations—even those who find abortion morally reprehensible.

This so-called “contraceptive mandate” was left untouched by the Supreme Court, meaning that faith-based organizations will be legally required to offer abortion as a healthcare option to employees.

So needless to say, Obamacare matters for followers of Christ. Imagine this: Christian schools, publishers, hospitals, and ministries telling their pregnant employees that they have the right to obtain an abortion—with the company health plan! Sadly, this is the new reality.

The question is, what are Christians to do? Indeed, it seems we are now facing quite a dilemma. On the one hand, we are commanded in God’s Word to honor the secular government by obeying its laws, pursuing its good, and living peaceable lives. On the other hand, however, we are commanded in God’s Word to be stewards and agents of an even greater good—the Gospel—and thus we must call out evil for what it is and do everything in our power to resist it and oppose it at every turn.

So what must we Christians think and do about Obamacare? Now that it has been upheld by the Supreme Court, what does that mean for us who hate abortion and are deeply concerned about protecting the lives of millions of unborn babies? Should we just refuse to comply to the government in this matter? Should we just throw our hands up and hope that God will work all of this out? How can we be most faithful?

Love God. Love Others. Hate Abortion.

The main thing that we Christians must always do is love God and cherish his laws above all else. Jesus himself affirmed that the greatest and most important of all God’s commands is to “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” (Matt. 22:37) Jesus also adds that we are to have a genuine, specific love and care for others. Both of these commands, says Jesus, serve as a summary of the whole Christian life. That is, every other command we have in the Word of God amounts to a more specific command to love God and love others.

In loving God and others, we must hate whatever stands against God and the well-being of others. Abortion does both. It violates God’s holy commands to understand that human life belongs to God and must be respected and guarded at every turn. And abortion stands against the well-being of human beings because it suggests that human life is dispensable. Thus, abortion sets a tone for a selfish and violent disregard for others while we pursue our own agenda.

An important part of our Christian growth and witness is our capacity to openly identify the moral failures of our society and reject them on the basis of biblical truth. Of course must not do so in a self-righteous or judgmental spirit. After all, we of all people know that we are helpless sinners who have been forgiven only by God’s mercy in Christ. Though we were rebels against God and his laws, he sent Jesus to bear the righteous wrath of God by dying on the cross. And it is only through Jesus’ death and resurrection that we are made right before God.

So we must reject abortion, because it presents a false and destructive message about the character of God and the value of human life.

Responsibly Challenge Government Overreach

As Christians, it is our moral duty to be good citizens. That is, we must live within the legal bounds set by our secular government, knowing that we are living ultimately under the authority of our God. As we are instructed in the apostle Paul’s letter to the Romans, every secular authority is under God’s authority (Rom. 13:1). So as we seek to respect and cooperate with our federal and local authorities, we are indeed honoring God.

However, this does not mean that secular governments possess boundless authority that cannot, or should not, be challenged. There are times when, in loving truth and standing against evil, we will inevitably find ourselves in opposition with the secular government. In such times, we must not waver from the truth of Scripture, but rather insist on it. But we must pursue responsible, Christ-commending ways of resisting wrong—not simply saying and doing things that we know will draw antagonism and bring backlash but have no immediate or eternal impact.

In the case of the Obamacare abortion coverage mandate, there are legal avenues of challenging the legislation, and many courageous groups and individuals are currently engaged in that battle in the courts and elsewhere. As long as we live in a democratic society that will allow us to do so, we must find ways to challenge the destructive policies of the state, while affirming its God-given authority by working within its legal parameters.

By doing so, we can go a long way in “put[ting] to silence the ignorance of foolish people” (1 Peter 2:15) who expect Christians to either act out and cause trouble or compromise on our morals in order to comply.

Same-Sex Marriage and the Civil Rights Movement

/ Marcus Glover / Leave a comment

There is a new civil rights movement underway in the United States of America.

At least, that’s what many proponents of same-sex marriage would have us believe. Among those Americans who support the legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States, one common line of reasoning and rhetoric involves drawing comparisons between the current battle over gay marriage and the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

Some, like David Badash who writes for a pro-gay marriage blog called The New Civil Rights Movement, are quite explicit in the comparison they draw. In a recent article, Badash writes in a matter-of-fact tone that “there is no valid reason to oppose same-sex marriage, just as there is no valid reason to oppose interracial marriage.”

Do you see what Badash is doing here? He is attempting to portray gay marriage as an issue that essentially boils down to basic fairness and humane treatment of an oppressed, marginalized minority. By Badash’s logic, the very same issues that lie at the heart of racial prejudice and discrimination also lie at the heart of the debate surrounding same-sex marriage.

The implication is clear: If you support racial equality, then you must also support same-sex marriage. After all, they are really just two sides of the same coin. Moreover, those who oppose same-sex marriage while supporting racial equality are not only bigots, but they are the worst kind of bigots—hypocritical bigots.

While I understand much of the underlying logic of the comparison between same-sex marriage and the civil rights movement, I see one major problem with it: it is downright wrong. Period. When it comes to issues of morality, human decency, and equality, there are no legitimate grounds for comparison between the campaign for same-sex marriage and the civil rights movement.

If this is true, then why do so many people insist on drawing this comparison? Well, I think the comparison is often rooted in any number of faulty assumptions with regard to same-sex attraction.  Allow me to address just one of these assumptions here.

Desire is Destiny: I was born this way

In her recent song “Born This Way,” pop singer Lady Gaga expresses the pervasive spirit of our age:

Don’t hide yourself in regret,

Just love yourself and you’re set

I’m on the right track, baby

I was born this way

Lady Gaga continues later in the song:

No matter gay, straight, or bi

Lesbian, transgendered life

I’m on the right track, baby

‘Cause baby, you were born this way

Notice the logic articulated in these lyrics. Since we all possess personal attributes that we did not choose, and therefore cannot change, we should never be restricted from pursuing actions and lifestyle related to these attributes. Some even go a step further and suggest that these attributes have been given to us by God, and so therefore it is God’s design that we live it out without embarrassment.

Whether it’s race or sexual orientation, or anything else, it’s who you are. Do not try to change, and do not let anyone treat you differently. God made you that way, and you can’t change that. So embrace it, and don’t try to change who you are.

Hence the supposed connection between same-sex marriage and racial equality. The prevailing assumption is that same-sex attraction is as fundamental to a person’s identity as their ethnicity. You didn’t choose it, and you can’t change it. Therefore, to deny an individual the right to legally marry simply because of their sexual orientation is just as unjust as denying an individual the right to vote simply because of the color of their skin. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter how you slice it.

However, there are several flaws in this logic. First, it is simply naïve to assume that we are not held accountable for desires that we did not choose. Conventional wisdom in our postmodern society says we are only responsible for the things we consciously think, decide, or do. But Romans 1 tells a different story.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

-Romans 1:18-21

This is what we Christians call Total Depravity. It means we were all born with two things: (1) an inherent knowledge of God’s nature, majesty, and righteous standards; (2) a corrupt heart and mind which do not acknowledge and submit to God’s nature, majesty, and standards.

This is true for all of us. And guess what? We did not choose to be born this way. But the fact that we did not choose it does not mean God does not hold us accountable. That much is clear in the above passage. Rather than letting human beings off the hook God reveals his wrath.

This is instructive for us Christians in how we relate to the gay community. We need to recognize that the debate over whether same-sex attraction is a choice actually misses the point! Regardless of whether same-sex attraction is a choice, it’s still sin, much like pride is a sin even though I don’t really choose to be prideful in my heart. And like every other sin, we must turn away from it and trust in Jesus Christ who died on a cross to bear the righteous wrath of God.

Same-sex attraction, it appears, is not always a choice. But we Christians have a theology that can handle that. Instead of insisting homosexuals are willfully choosing to be attracted others of their same sex, we should plead with our homosexual friends to turn away from these desires—rather than acting on them—and ask God to forgive them in Christ and help them change by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Ethnicity, on the other hand, is morally neutral. In other words, it is not a sin to be black, white, Hispanic, Asian, or any other ethnicity. On the contrary, God has created us all with particular ethnic backgrounds in order to display his own beauty in the diversity of his creation. As human beings created in God’s own image, we are all endowed with a certain kind of inherent dignity and respect.

The civil rights movement was about upholding and affirming this inherent dignity of all human beings, regardless of ethnicity. Courageous men and women of all ages and ethnic backgrounds gave their lives to fight for this kind of equality because it is good, right, and just. In various places in the world—including in our very own country—this fight continues, and it is always a battle worth fighting.

The gay marriage movement is about making room for sinful lifestyles under the guise of tolerance and equality.

The distinction between these two movements is of vast importance, and we must be crystal clear about what is at stake in both. Let us be valiant in our pursuit of justice for the oppressed and marginalized, but always standing for truth. God has not called us to compromise.