The Art of Divine Contentment: An Exposition of Philippians 4:11 by Thomas Watson. Excerpt 76

As his little book comes toward the end, Watson lists ways that a believer shows that she has divine contentment:

Character 3d. A contented spirit is a thankful spirit. This is a degree above the other; “in every thing giving thanks.” (1 Th. 5. 18) A gracious heart spies mercy in every condition, therefore hath his heart screwed up to thankfulness; others will bless God for prosperity, he blesseth him for affliction. Thus he reasons with himself; am I in want? God sees it better for me to want than to abound; God is now dieting of me, he sees it better for my spiritual health sometimes to be kept fasting; therefore he doth not only submit but is thankful. The malcontent is ever complaining of his condition; the contented spirit is ever giving thanks.

O what height of grace is this! A contented heart is a temple where the praises of God are sung forth, not a sepulchre wherein they are buried. A contented Christian in the greatest straits hath his heart enlarged and dilated in thankfulness; he oft contemplates God’s love in election; he sees that he is a monument of mercy, therefore desires to be a pattern of praise. There is always gratulatory music in a contented soul; the Spirit of grace works in the heart like new wine, which under the heaviest pressures of sorrow will have a vent open for thankfulness: this is to be content.

Character 4th. He that is content, no condition comes amiss to him; so it is in the text, “in whatever state I am.” A contented Christian can turn himself to anything; either want or abound. The people of Israel knew neither how to abound, nor yet how to want; when they were in want they murmured; “can God prepare a table in the wilderness?” and when they ate, and were filled, then they lifted up the heel. Paul knew how to manage every state; he could be either a note higher or lower; he was in this sense an universalist, he could do anything that God would have him: if he were in prosperity, he knew how to be thankful; if in adversity, he knew how to be patient; he was neither lifted up with the one, nor cast down with the other. He could carry a greater sail, or lesser. Thus a contented Christian knows how to turn himself to any condition. We have those who can be contented in some condition, but not in every estate; they can be content in a wealthy estate, when they have the streams of milk and honey; while God’s candle shines upon their head, now they are content, but if the wind turn and be against them, now they are discontented. While they have a silver crutch to lean upon, they are contented; but if God breaks this crutch, now they are discontented. But Paul had learned in every estate to carry himself with an equanimity of mind. Others could be content with their affliction, so God would give them leave to pick and choose. They could be content to bear such a cross; they could better endure sickness than poverty, or bear loss of estate than loss of children; if they might have such a man’s cross they could be content. A contented Christian doth not go to choose his cross, but leaves God to choose for him; he is content both for the kind and the duration. A contented spirit saith, “let God apply what medicine he pleaseth, and let it lie on as long as it will; I know when it hath done its cure, and eaten the venom of sin out of my heart, God will take it off again.”

Thomas Watson lived from 1620-1686, in England. He wrote several books which survive. This blog, God willing, will post excerpts from his The Art of Divine Contentment: An Exposition of Philippians 4:11, over a number of weeks, on Sundays.

My source for the text is here, and I thank the Christian Classics Ethereal Library for making this text (and many others) available. The previous excerpt is here.
  
Philippians 4:11 Not that I speak because of lack, for I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content in it. (World English Bible, public domain.)    

Homosexuality: Questions and Answers

On June 13, 2009, I posted a rather long discussion of homosexuality. I tried to be kind to all readers and commenters. There were quite a few of both. Since that time, that post has slipped into obscurity. As I understand it, search engines look for newer posts first, usually. So I'm posting it again, hoping that others, who haven't known it was there, will read it, and comment.

March 4, 2023: Someone pointed out that, although scriptural references to homosexuality seem to be against such behavior, none of these cases were about a committed monogamous relationship between two men, or between two women. 

Back to original post, and (comments) which has not been changed: There are is another reason for re-posting. One of the currently leading Democratic Presidential candidates is a practicing homosexual. And the apparent leading Republican candidate is a serial adulterer. If you want to know more about these things, do a web search for "Trump adultery," or for "Butigeig." (Butigeig spoke about his faith in an interview reported by Relevant. Here's a Trump adultery timeline in Newsweek.)

In this post, I'm not going to discuss the question of whether being an active homosexual, or a serial adulterer, makes one unacceptable, in God's sight, of being President of the US. Nor do I wish to discuss the question of whether believing voters could conscientiously support either of these types of person. Perhaps in further posts.

The last reason for re-posting is that I posted, on January 11, 2011, a comment about the sexual abuse scandals in the Catholic church. I should not have written as if Catholic clergy are/were the only abusers. They aren't. I have since read of a sexual abuse scandal involving Southern Baptist youth ministers in Texas. and of another abuse case in a Jewish training institution. Unfortunately, there are probably a lot more cases of ministers betraying their trust, their profession, and their God by such behavior.

Here's the original post:

Saturday, June 13, 2009

Homosexuality: Questions and Answers

Christians often make one of two mistakes about homosexuality. Some say that there is nothing wrong with homosexual activity, and some say that it is the worst (or the only) sin. Neither of these is consistent with the Bible. The most important question related to homosexuality is the authority of the Bible.There are only a few direct scriptural references to homosexuality: Genesis 19:1-5, 12; Leviticus 18:22; 20:13; Romans 1:24-27; I Corinthians 6:9-20; I Timothy 1:10; Jude 1:7. (Deuteronomy 23:17-18 probably refers to homosexual prostitution.) Some, who mostly fall into the first error above, say that:
Genesis 19 is about gang rape, not homosexuality Ezekiel 16:48-50, Isaiah 1:10-17, Jeremiah 23:14 and Matthew 10:11-15 indicate that homosexuality was not the primary sin of the inhabitants of Sodom -it was lack of justice, lack of hospitality, and rejection of God - but see Jude 1:7, which says something about sexual sin;
that the passages in Leviticus and Romans aren't relevant for today's practicing homosexuals, because they condemn unnatural acts by heterosexuals;
while today's homosexuals are doing what is natural for them;
that I Corinthians and I Timothy are against pederasty, not the homosexuality of today.

These arguments may have some validity, but there is a strong biblical argument against homosexual activity. It is not from the texts cited above (although they are part of the evidence) but from the scriptural portrayal of heterosexual fidelity as God's ideal for humans, from the earliest parts of Genesis to the portrayal of the church as the bride of Christ in Revelation. (See Genesis 2:18-24, Exodus 20:14, Proverbs 5, The Song of Solomon, Ezekiel 16, Hosea 1-3, Matthew 19:4-6, John 2:1-11, Revelation 19:6-8, and elsewhere.)

1. Is homosexuality wrong? Yes and no. Based on scripture, homosexual activity is wrong. Homosexual tendencies are not wrong, any more than heterosexual ones, unless those tendencies are due to wrong choices. If I am attracted to someone other than my wife, because I have heterosexual tendencies, and act on it, that's wrong. Having the tendencies isn't wrong. (Acting on it doesn't mean just adultery or fornication--deliberately exposing myself to pornography, or lusting after movie stars, etc., are ways of acting on heterosexual tendency, and acting sinfully.) It isn't wrong to have heterosexual tendencies, unless those tendencies are due to wrong choices, so why should it be wrong to have homosexual tendencies?

2. Is homosexual tendency built in? In some cases. Recent evidence indicates that pre-natal hormonal exposure is important. There is probably some genetic influence. But some people choose homosexuality over heterosexuality. (James Dobson believes that homosexuality is due to how a child was raised, which is probably part of the story. If it were all of the story, the cause would be neither a choice by the person or some built-in factor.)

3. Isn't having homosexual tendencies, but not being able to act on them without sinning, unfair? God is not ever unfair. He may demand more of some than others, in certain aspects of their lives. All of us are born with tendencies that we must control in order to live Christian lives. It isn't just homosexuals that are called to life-long celibacy -- some heterosexuals are. All heterosexuals are, until they are married.

4. Can homosexuals form long-lasting same-sex relationships? Apparently. However, this often doesn't happen. (It often doesn't happen with heterosexual marriage relationships, either, but that's another sad story.) Are such relationships identical to stable Christian heterosexual marriages, in God's sight? No. They aren't God's plan. You could have a long-lasting sexual relationship with a prostitute, or even a dog, but the fact that it's long-lasting doesn't make it right. 

5. Can homosexuals become happy heterosexuals? At least some of the time. (See 1 Corinthians 6:9-11.) Probably not all of the time.

6. What should be the Christian attitude toward homosexuals? Practicing homosexuals, like practicing gossips, gluttons or thieves, are sinners. We should love them, but not love their sin. Overt sinners should not be leaders in churches, and certainly not pastors.

7. Is homosexuality the worst threat to marriage in North America? No. If there were no homosexuals at all, marriage would still be under continuing and violent attack from its real worst enemy, namely that a woman and a man don't make Jesus Christ Lord of their relationship.

8. Is homosexual activity the worst sin? No. See what Jesus said in comparing Sodom to the people of his day, in Matthew 11:20-24, and Luke 10:1-12. Romans 1 indicates that homosexual behavior is a symptom of a worse sin, idolatry or unbelief.

Homosexual activity is not even the worst sexual sin -- it's not part of the 10 Commandments. (Adultery, of course, is prohibited in the 10 Commandments.) There's a list of curses for sinful activity in Deuteronomy 27:15-26. Four such were curses for sexual misconduct, and they didn't include homosexual activity. (That does not, of course, make homosexual activity acceptable for Christians.)

There are some other topics that I wish to mention briefly.

Intersexuality, or ambiguous anatomical sexual anatomy
(See Wikipedia article.) There is controversy over classification issues, but it seems that from 0.05% to as many as 1.7% of babies born have genital anatomy that is not normal. What does that have to do with homosexuality? This -- not everyone is born "normal." People do not choose to be born with ambiguous external genitals, nor do they become this way because of the way that their parents raised them, which relates, at least somewhat, to the questions of how people become homosexual, and God's fairness to them. So far as I know, Christian thinkers have not considered this phenomenon at all, let alone in depth.

Civil Unions
Should Christians oppose civil unions? A civil union would give homosexual couples some legal rights, such as joint ownership of property, and hospital visitation rights, but would not have the same type of recognition as a marriage. This is a difficult question, and I haven't resolved it in my own mind. If I am offered the chance to vote on the issue, I will try to make up my mind, God helping me. On the one hand, it seems unfair to deny a person, who has been a caregiver, hospital visitation rights for the person he or she has cared for, regardless of their sexual preferences. On the other hand, this might be a step toward full recognition of marriage between homosexuals, on the same basis as between heterosexuals, and, as indicated above, I do not believe that a homosexual couple can have God-approved marriage.

A church-approved marriage does not need to be the same as a state-approved marriage, although, often, it is. Couples, even totally unchurched couples, often seem to believe that they have a right to a church wedding, and churches often comply, sometimes even without any pre-marital counseling. Probably many churches, including my own, have, occasionally, had marriage ceremonies between a man and a woman performed that united couples that God really didn't want together.

Should Homosexuals be allowed to join churches?
I would draw upon the example of the early church, except that I am not clear as to whether the early church had membership in the same way that many churches do today. Let me stipulate that a church member is someone that the congregation, or its leaders, believes is a converted Christian, who is in agreement with basic Bible doctrine, and Christian practice, as understood by that church.

I don't see any reason to deny membership to a person with homosexual tendencies, as indicated above. Based on 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, persons engaged in homosexual activity should not be taken into membership, any more than greedy people, or swindlers, should be. They are mentioned in the same list as homosexuals. The good news is that the same passage states that some of the current members of the Corinthian church used to do some of these things, but had been redeemed from such activities, presumably including homosexuality.

Thanks for reading.

*  *  *  *  *

Added Jan 26, 2013: Here's a later post, on adultery and fornication. 

Added July 29, 2014: Here's a later post, on the idea that Jesus referred to homosexuality without condemning it. 

Added January 8, 2015: Here's my post on what's wrong with the political left/right in the US

Added January 18, 2015: One of the possible dangers, for the near future, for Christians, is that merely saying that the Bible says that homosexual activity is sinful may be called illegal hate speech, no matter what the motivation or tone of the statement. In other words, even answering a question: "Does the Bible say that homosexual activity is sinful?" with a "Yes, I believe that it does" may lead to legal action.

Added May 27, 2016: Benjamin L. Corey writes that some Christians are changing their attitude toward homosexuals, and indicates why this is so. (He thinks it's a good thing, by the way.)

On June 8, 2016, I added scriptural references to the first paragraph. I recommend this post on scripture and homosexuality by Ken Schenck.

On June 9, 2017, I found this post from Sojourners, which gives 10 Bible passages which, according to the article, indicate that the church should not condemn persons who are practicing homosexual behavior. 

This is a post, by me, arguing that marriage was not a sacrament in New Testament times.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)