Sunspots 730

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

Christianity: Relevant reports that a church has a standing offer to pay (at about $8000) for weddings of couples, in the church, who are living together without being married. About 60 couples have done this.

A pastor of a white congregation explains why ministering to African-Americans and whites at the same time is hard.

Computing: Gizmodo discusses some reasons for checking our smart phones a lot.

Education: Grammarphobia tells us that the meanings of  "emerge" and "emergency" are related.

Health: If you're a woman, you probably won't be surprised. NPR reports on a study indicating that women do better at clerical tasks when the room temperature is not so cold.

Humor: (or something) A Gizmodo article explains how some magic tricks are done.

(or something) Relevant reports that the Ark Encounter is suing because of rain damage.


Politics: Catherine Rampell on how the Trump Administration has tinkered with government statistics in various ways.

NPR reports that a lot of so-called American soil is actually owned by foreign entities.

FiveThirtyEight discusses the laws that state governments are seeking to have adopted, in states where the legislature and the governor are both from the same party.

Michael Gerson is not happy with the Trump Administration's decision to slow down the replacement of Andrew Jackson's picture, on $20 bills, by that of Harriet Tubman, and says that Tubman, even after death, makes her enemies look foolish.

Science: There's a lot of water on Mars, according to Gizmodo.

A Christianity Today writer discusses the question of whether non-human animals appreciate beauty.

Gizmodo discusses attempts to control monkey populations in India, where the animals have been responsible for several human deaths.

Listverse describes 10 organisms that don't seem to have any limits on their lifespan.

The graphic used in these posts is from NASA, hence, I believe, it is public domain. 

Thanks for looking!

The Art of Divine Contentment: An Exposition of Philippians 4:11 by Thomas Watson. Excerpt 79

Watson now lists some rules for contentment:

I proceed now to an use of direction, to show Christians how they may attain to this divine art of contentation. Certainly it is feasible, others of God’s saints have reached to it. St Paul here had it; and what do we think of those we read of in that little book of martyrs, (He. 11) who had trials of cruel mockings and scourgings, who wandered about in deserts and caves, yet were contented; so that it is possible to be had. And here I shall lay down some rules for holy contentment.

Rule 1. Advance faith. All our disquiets do issue immediately from unbelief. It is this that raiseth the storm of discontent in the heart. O set faith a-work! It is the property of faith to silence our doubtings, to scatter our fears, to still the heart when the passions are up. Faith works the heart to a sweet serene composure; it is not having food and raiment, but having faith, which will make us content. Faith chides down passion; when reason begins to sink, let faith swim.

How doth faith work contentment? 
1. Faith shows the soul that whatever its trials are yet it is from the hand of a father; it is indeed a bitter cup, but “shall I not drink the cup which my father hath given me to drink?” It is in love to my soul: God corrects me with the same love he crowns me; God is now training me up for heaven; he carves me, to make me a polished shaft. These sufferings bring forth patience, humility, even the peaceful fruits of righteousness. (He. 12. 11) And if God can bring such sweet fruit out of our stock, let him graft me where he pleases. Thus faith brings the heart to holy contentment. 
2. Faith sucks the honey of contentment out of the hive of the promise. Christ is the vine, the promises are the clusters of grapes that grow upon this vine, and faith presseth the sweet wine of contentment out of these spiritual clusters of the promises. I will show you but one cluster, “the Lord will give grace and glory;” (Ps. 84. 11) here is enough for faith to live upon. The promise is the flower out of which faith distills the spirits and quintessence of divine contentment. In a word, faith carries up the soul, and makes it aspire after more generous and noble delights than the earth affords, and to live in the world above the world. Would ye live contented lives? Live up to the height of your faith.

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.)  

"oil to make his face to shine"

Psalm 104 is a great nature poem, probably written by David. I've read it many times, and you probably have, too. Here's part of it that recently struck me:

14 He causes the grass to grow for the livestock,
    and plants for man to cultivate,
    that he may produce food out of the earth:
15 wine that makes glad the heart of man,
    oil to make his face to shine,
    and bread that strengthens man’s heart. (World English Bible, public domain.)

OK. Grass for pasture for livestock, plants for garden vegetables and fruit, wine, and bread for food. But oil to make our faces to shine? Where did that come from?

The Bible Gateway, using the World English Bible, indicates that the word, "oil," occurs about 200 times in the Bible, with only a few of these in the New Testament. Oil was used as fuel for lamps, and was used on people who had been injured. It was also used in cooking, and to anoint people, as a sign of honoring them.

The first use of the word, in the Bible, is in this verse:
Genesis 28:18 Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put under his head, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil on its top.

Jacob was fleeing from the wrath of his brother, Esau, and this use was a form of worship, of thanking God for showing Jacob a vision. It is interesting that Jacob, presumably running away with only essential possessions, would have had oil among those possessions.

Leviticus mentions oil more than any other book in the Bible does. It was to be used in some types of offering to God, and was also to be used to anoint the priests, as a sign that they were separated for the Lord's work.

I Samuel tells us that Saul was anointed with oil, as a sign that he was to be the first king of Israel. David, who took Saul's place when Saul didn't obey God, was also anointed as a sign of God's calling.

1 Kings 17 tells the story of how a widow fed herself, her son, and Elijah, by cooking or baking them a mixture of oil and meal, for at least several days. The containers of meal and oil were miraculously kept from being empty.

Luke 7 tells the story of how a Pharisee invited Jesus to eat with him. Jesus rebuked the host because he hadn't anointed His head with oil. (A woman anointed His feet with her tears.)

OK. Back to Psalm 104. That Psalm doesn't mention oil as an offering, oil for food, or oil for healing. It probably doesn't imply using oil for anointing. It just says "to make his face to shine." A couple of thoughts on that. One is that, although the Bible doesn't say that cleanliness is next to godliness, God apparently appreciates cleanliness, in spirit, and in body and in our surroundings. The other is that Psalm 104 seems to be endorsing the use of cosmetics. Like so many other things, cosmetics can be, and are, over-used. But making our faces look good seems to be part of God's best plan for us, and doing so by application of at least one substance seems to be endorsed by Psalm 104.

Thanks for reading!

Sunspots 729

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

Christianity: He Lives on what legalism is, and related matters.

Christianity Today on a report that 1 in 10 young Protestants have left their churches because of sexual harassment of various kinds.
 
Finance: Catherine Rampell on how Democrats should be attacking President Trump's trade failures, but mostly aren't.

National Public Radio reports on financial problems, and lavish compensation for top people, in the National Rifle Association.

Humor: (or something) A bear, moved away from her habitat, has walked back home, traveling up to 30 miles a day, over several months, according to NPR.


Politics: S. E. Cupp thinks Elizabeth Warren is too much like President Trump, in her approach to people and institutions that disagree with her.

FiveThirtyEight analyzes poll results indicating what types of people voters would be uncomfortable with as candidates. Many, for example, say they would not be comfortable with a Presidential candidate over 70. (Donald Trump received considerable support, of course, and he turned 70 on election day, 2016)

Michael Gerson discusses the absence of a Christian Democratic party in the US. (Such parties exist, and often do well, in Europe).

Catherine Rampell discusses what might come to light when President Trump's tax returns become available, and how and why he (and others) have worked hard to keep them hidden.

Science: Gizmodo reports that there are a lot of escaped parrots -- several species -- living in the US, and doing well.

Gizmodo also reports that Escherichia coli bacteria with an artificially produced genome are viable.

The graphic used in these posts is from NASA, hence, I believe, it is public domain. 

Thanks for looking!

The Art of Divine Contentment: An Exposition of Philippians 4:11 by Thomas Watson. Excerpt 78

Watson continues his description of a contented Christian:

He that is contented with his condition, to rid himself out of trouble, will not turn himself into sin. I deny not but a Christian may lawfully seek to change his condition: so far as God’s providence doth go before, he may follow. But when men will not follow providence but run before it, as he that said, “this evil is of the Lord, why should I wait any longer. (2 Ki. 6. 33) If God doth not open the door of his providence, they will break it open, and wind themselves out of affliction by sin; bringing their souls into trouble; this is far from holy contentation, this is unbelief broken into rebellion. A contented Christian is willing to wait God’s leisure, and will not stir till God open a door. As Paul said in another case, “they have beaten us openly, uncondemned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison, and now do they thrust us out privily? nay, verily, but let them come themselves and fetch us out:” (Ac. 16. 37) so, with reverence, saith the contented Christian, God hath cast me into this condition; and though it be sad, and troublesome, yet I will not stir, till God by a clear providence fetch me out. Thus those brave spirited Christians; “they accepted not deliverance,” (He. 11. 35) that is, upon base dishonourable terms. They would rather stay in prison than purchase their liberty by carnal compliance. Estius observes on the place, “they might not only have had their enlargements, but been raised to honour, and put into offices of trust, yet the honour of religion was dearer to them, than either liberty or honour.”

A contented Christian will not remove, till as the Israelites he sees a pillar of cloud and fire going before him. “It is good that a man should both hope, and quietly wait for the salvation of the Lord. (La. 3. 26) It is good to stay God’s leisure and not to extricate ourselves out of trouble, till we see the star of God’s providence pointing out a way to us.

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.)  

Sunspots 728

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

Finance: Catherine Rampell doesn't think President Trump's bashing of the Federal Reserve, or his apparent eagerness to get into a trade war with China, are good ideas. She says that these two mistakes will work together to hurt the US economy more than either, by itself.

Food: Relevant reports that a Rhode Island school district is going to give students who owe lunch money jelly sandwiches. In a later report, NPR reports that this policy has been rolled back. Some school districts are giving meals to children whose parents/guardians who haven't paid for lunches, when, apparently, they could do so, and have spent many thousands of dollars to feed these children.

Politics: Relevant reports that Jerry Falwell, Jr., says that President Trump should be awarded two extra years in office, because of the attacks on him during the first two years.

Relevant also reports that a Georgia politician believes that intermarriage between whites and non-whites is against the Bible's teaching.

Gizmodo, and other news outlets, report that the US refused to sign a declaration that climate change is endangering the Arctic environment.

S. E. Cupp reports that the Obama administration used drones in conflicts in some questionable ways, and that the Trump administration is using even more drones as deadly weapons.

Science: (or something) Jeff Bezos, head of Amazon, and the richest man on the planet, says we need to move some of us off of the earth, in order to save humanity. The editor of Earther begs to differ.

The graphic used in these posts is from NASA, hence, I believe, it is public domain.

Thanks for looking!

Sunspots 727

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

The Arts: Peter Mayhew, who played Chewbacca in the Star Wars films, has died. He was over seven feet tall. 

The History Blog reports that Maurice Sendak, of Where the Wild Things Are fame, also worked on stage design, for operas.

Christianity: National Public Radio reports on a fairly rare couple -- they were both virgins when they were married.


Computing: Gizmodo tells us how to delete voice recordings from Google Home.

Finance: Catherine Rampell on why Stephen Moore should not be nominated to the Federal Reserve Board by President Trump. The Hill says that Lindsay Graham and other Republican senators also are doubtful about Moore. Eventually, his name was withdrawn.

Health: Gizmodo reports on the variety of things men will try, in order (they hope) to grow taller.

NPR on why it's so hard to lose weight.

(and politics) Catherine Rampell reports that Attorney General Barr has joined legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act. If these challenges succeed, millions of people will lose health insurance, and other popular provisions of the ACA will be null and void.

Politics: Michael Gerson complains about Attorney General Barr's belief in the expansion of the power of the President.

Science: Gizmodo asks if there will ever be new colors that humans can see.

Gizmodo reports that Chinese scientists, and others, claim that the recent gene-changing procedure, using the CRISPR system to alter the genes of two girls, was unnecessary, and that the whole procedure was flawed.

The graphic used in these posts is from NASA, hence, I believe, it is public domain. 

Thanks for looking!

Is the sun important to us? Absolutely

Why is the sun important to us?
 
For starters, the gravitational attraction of the sun holds the earth in a stable orbit, which is necessary for our very existence as living beings on this planet.

The sun is a giant source of energy. Einstein pointed out the relationship between energy and mass, in his famous e = m c-squared equation. Every second, thousands of tons of mass are turned into energy, by the sun. The process involves four Hydrogen nuclei fusing into a Helium nucleus, which has a little less mass than the Hydrogen nuclei. This fusion wouldn’t be possible without the extreme temperature in the core of the sun – millions of degrees. Temperature is a measurement of the velocity of molecules. At absolute zero, all motion ceases. In the core of the sun, the velocity of particles is so high that they can overcome natural forces of mutual repulsion, hence slamming together and fusing nuclei.

In case you didn’t know, the c in Einstein’s equation is the velocity of light, a large number, and it’s squared. That means that a little bit of mass can be converted to a lot of energy.

What happens to the sun’s radiated energy? Most of it goes off into space, perhaps eventually hitting something. The sun is about 93,000,000 miles away from us. Think of a giant sphere, with a diameter that large. The sun’s radiated energy goes off evenly in all directions. The earth occupies only a very small fraction of the surface of that imaginary sphere. But that very small fraction gets hit by a tiny bit of the sun’s emitted energy, and that is very important to us.

Energy from the sun keeps the earth at a temperature compatible with human, and other, life. It is possible that there is life elsewhere in the solar system, but not likely. Either conditions would be too hot for life, or too cold, in most planets and planetary moons, such as the moons of Saturn.
 
Energy from the sun, in the form of light, makes it possible for us to perceive the world around us, using vision. Most insects, most vertebrates, and some other animals use vision, which would be impossible without light from the sun. (Some animals can see types of light that we can’t, but that statement still applies.) We can perceive the world around us in other ways, to be sure, but vision is arguably more important than the other senses we have.

Energy from the sun makes the seasons possible, and also makes various critically important earthly phenomena, such as the water cycle, possible. Energy from the sun makes erosion and weathering of rocks possible.

Energy from the sun, in the form of light, makes photosynthesis possible. Essentially all of the food energy we take in came directly or indirectly from photosynthesis. In photosynthesis, light is captured by green plants, who use it to produce sugars and various other organic substances, that we need to build ourselves, and to release energy to keep us going.

Is the sun important to us? Absolutely. Yes, that’s the right word – absolutely.

Perhaps St. Paul was speaking of the critical importance of light, when, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he wrote “1 Timothy 6:15b who is the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and eternal power. Amen. (World English Bible, public domain.)

Does the Bible say that sex change is sinful?

National Public Radio recently posted a story on a disagreement over sex education in a public school. NPR quoted one person involved in this struggle: "When you fundamentally discredit the very nature of God's creation of our youth as male and female, you are seeking to discredit God."

There are a lot of people who believe that God's living creation is either male or female. Why? One reason is this verse: Genesis 1:27 "God created man in his own image. In God’s image he created him; male and female he created them." Claiming that there is legitimacy in changing gender, however it is proposed to be accomplished, is taken to violate this verse, and, therefore, to "discredit God."

Gender variations in non-humans
This verse does not seem to apply to non-humans, as it is in the section of Genesis 1 which speaks of the creation of human beings. Many non-human organisms are not either male or female. Many plants and invertebrate animals are both male and female. Especially in plants, and in some animals, sex simply has to  do with who produces sperm and who produces eggs. There is no courtship in plants, and there are no obvious sex role differences in them, or in some animals. In some animals, sex roles are not what you might expect. For example, there are amphibians in which the sperm-producing male takes care of the young. See here and here for videos. Many kinds of birds share care of the young. Some birds, especially pigeons and doves, produce crop milk, which serves some of the same functions as the milk of mammals. Crop milk is produced by both male and female birds.

There are vertebrate animals (fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals and birds) that can change sex. For example, chickens (and some other birds) can change sexes. Clown (Nemo) fish can change sex. Wrasse fish can change sex. The Wikipedia says this "Some species exhibit sequential hermaphroditism. In these species, such as many species of coral reef fishes, sex change is a normal anatomical process." There are not many examples of sex change in non-human mammals, and even in fish, birds and reptiles, as groups, sex change is the exception, not the rule.

Intersex humans
Many humans are born without being unambiguously male or female. Such intersex individuals are that way for several reasons, such as not having a normal complement of chromosomes, not having the normal anatomical apparatus for sex and reproduction, or having some of the anatomical apparatus of both sexes. See the Wikipedia article on "Intersex."

Genesis 1:27 is not the only passage with a statement that God created male and female. Genesis 5:2, Matthew 19:4 and Mark 10:6 also make this statement, and the latter two quote Genesis 1:27. Please remember that some people believe that Genesis 1 and 2 were meant to be taken literally, and some other Bible-believing people believe, with good reason, that it wasn't so meant. I suppose that the two quotes of 1:27, by Jesus, strengthen the literalness of that verse's interpretation.

The purpose of Genesis 1:27 probably was not to declare that a desire for gender change treatments or surgery is sinful. Even so, it's not necessarily wrong to conclude that from the verse. Intersex humans, and those desiring a gender change, may be a result of the Fall.

OK. Even If intersex people are a result of the Fall, shouldn't we do something about this? Weeds, malaria mosquitoes, AIDS, earthquakes, and many other entities may not be part of God's original plan for the earth, but are the result of a Creation that is not the way God wanted it. We typically do whatever we can to alleviate these, and other conditions. Adam was told, according to Genesis 3:17-19, that he would have to till the ground, in order to obtain food from it. Some of this tilling was pulling weeds, no doubt. 

There are more results of the Fall. Babies are born with cleft palates, for example. I doubt if God's original plan for humans included that, and believe that such a condition, insofar as we can, should be treated, as should leprosy, diabetes, poor eyesight, heart conditions, and many more things. Why not, then, perform surgery, or otherwise treat, babies born as intersex? (In cleft palate surgery, and intersex surgery, the best interest of the patient, so far as it can be determined, should be a guiding principle.) Usually, such surgery is performed. Genesis 1:27 doesn't preclude occurrences of intersex babies. Some of them aren't unambiguously either male or female.

I have argued, so far, that it is right to try to correct various ills in the world, insofar as we are able to, and are correcting for unselfish reasons.

Now we come to people who desire transgender treatment. Do we owe them, like an intersex or cleft palate baby, such treatment? Clearly, some people do not believe so, and, in fact wish to deny anyone transgender treatment, because changing sex is wrong in principle. I have cited a Biblical basis for such belief above. But, my experience tells me that some of the objection to transgender has nothing to do with the Bible, but, instead, is based on an intuition that such treatment is wrong -- unnatural, not the sort of thing we want to have anything to do with.

I cannot judge anyone's reason for desiring transgender treatment. Some people's desires for that may be no more wrong that my desire to get glasses so I can see well enough to read and drive. If that is true, I would argue that such a person should get transgender treatment. But it is also possible that some, or all, people who want transgender treatment are twisted souls whose desires and motives are evil, and going against what God planned. If I knew that that was true, I would be against any such treatment. But I don't know, and I'm glad that it's not up to me to judge. It seems to me that desiring sex change treatment is not necessarily a violation of God's will, whatever Genesis 1:27 may say.

He Lives has a good post on Gender Dysphoria (thinking you are a male in a female body, or the reverse, as I understand it), and argues that saying that that condition is always due solely to the wrong desire of the person affected comes close to being heresy.

Thanks for reading. Feel free to comment.

* * * * *
Added May 13, 2019: There is an article referred to in the first comment, below, which is highly critical of the ideas behind a lot of gender dysphoria and trans-sexualism.

The Art of Divine Contentment: An Exposition of Philippians 4:11 by Thomas Watson. Excerpt 77

Watson describes a contented Christian:

In a word, a contented Christian, being sweetly captivated under the authority of the word, desires to be wholly at God’s disposal, and is willing to live in that sphere and climate where God has set him. And if at any time he hath been an instrument of doing noble and brave service in the public, he knows he is but a rational tool, a servant to authority, and is content to return to his former condition of life. Cincinnatus, after he had done worthily, and purchased to himself great fame in his dictatorship, did notwithstanding afterwards voluntary return to till and manure his four acres of ground: thus should it be with Christians, professing godliness with contentment, having served Mars, daring to offend Jupiter; lest otherwise they discover only to the world a brutish valour, being so untamed and head-strong, that when they had conquered others, yet they are not able to rule their own spirits.

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.)  

Sunspots 726

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

The Arts: NPR discusses how movies have been getting longer and longer.

Christianity: A Relevant writer tells us 9 things we should do when reading the Bible. The 9 are ways to improve our understanding, and none of them are complicated.
(and health) A Christianity Today article discusses, at length, opposition to vaccination because some cell lines used to make material for use were derived from fetal tissue, and related issues.

Finance: Catherine Rampell on the incoherence of US trade policy toward Japan.

(and health) NPR reports on a snake bitten 9-year-old, who racked up medical bills of more than $140,000.

Health: NPR reports on adult family care in Vermont -- a way to avoid hospitals and nursing homes, for some, at least.

Politics: Based on the Mueller Report, Michael Gerson says that it's time for the US House to lay the groundwork for impeachment.

(Or something) Relevant reports on a few of the recent beheadings that are a feature of Saudi Arabian jurisprudence.

The graphic used in these posts is from NASA, hence, I believe, it is public domain. 

Thanks for looking!

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)