Tag Archives: justice

A New Victim of Gay Sexual Politics, Evangelical Lutheran Church

Posted on September 8, 2010 by | Leave a comment

By Daniel Downs

The Washington Times recently reported that a majority of leaders in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) voted to change church law admitting non-celibate gays into the sacred office of the clergy. At the same time, a majority of church leaders changed denominational law to recognize same-sex common law marriage (but by other terminology).

According to the report, “The resolution on clergy, easily the most controversial, passed by 559 ‘yes’ votes (55.3 percent) to 451 ‘no’ votes (44.6 percent). It committed the ELCA to open its clergy ranks to people in “publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships.”

The vote allowing congregations to ‘”recognize, support and hold publicly accountable life-long, monogamous, same-gender relationships,” passed by 619 ‘yes’ (60.6 percent) to 402 ‘no’ votes (39.3 percent) was less controversial than allowing non-celibate gays to represent the church and Christ.

The report noted two responses to these developments: Those who believe it will result in many people leaving the church and those who believe it will result in significant church growth. One member of the Metropolitan New York Synod said gays were the reason her congregation was growing. Leaders representing most American and foreign synods voiced strong disapproval of these decisions because of those decisions opposed more fundamental doctrines of the church.

As with other mainline denominations, the democratic politics and secularly defined social relevance appears to be the most important factors in these decisions.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in American cannot be charge with religious fundamentalism. They have tossed the fundamentals out. The most important fundamental is abiding under the Lordship of Jesus Christ. As recorded in the book of Revelation, Christ told the churches in Asia Minor that he hated the politics and practices of sexual immorality that were being spread by the Nicolaitans and Jezebel, who was likely one of their leaders in Thyatira. Like the mediocre Laodiceans, the Evangelical Lutheran Church can only be charged with being faithful to secular fundamentalism.

The still popular song lyric sung by Jackie DeShannon expresses the religious sentiment of modern sexual politics, “all we need now is love … sweet [tolerant] love” not holiness and truth.

The problem with all of this is not whether the church will grow, or split, or gain social relevance. After this season testing, the problem will be when and how the Lord will come and fight against the immoral and their supporters. As Christ promised the Pergamum church, he will come and fight against them with the sword of His mouth. If that means anything like his warning to the unrepenting Jezebel, they and their loving supporters may receive the same judgment that the members of the tolerantly immoral cities of Sodom and Gomorrah received.

Whatever the outcome, it is clear that those who do not like a God who actually judges and punishes moral crime (sin, immortality) hate the rule of law and especially moral law. Moral law is God’s law.

One of the foundational doctrines of the Evangelical Lutheran Church concerns salvation: forgiveness of our moral crimes because Jesus suffered our punishment for them. That is what the death of Jesus on a wooden cross is all about. This grace of God is not tolerance. It is covenantal love based on unbending justice. The power of this gospel is newness of life by the power of God. A new life means old sinful lifestyles pass away. Anything less is a mockery of Christ’s life and death as well as God’s mercy and power, which “taking the name of the Lord in vain” means. It’s like being married but not acting like it, which is the reason the Church cannot justify marrying gays or any other sinners.

The Church cannot serve two masters: one in conformity with secular politics and the other with God in covenantal holiness. Condoning sin while claiming righteousness is so oxymoronic to be laughable. Maybe this is the reason for talk about the Church being irrelevant in contemporary culture.

Yes, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America maybe another victim of secular sexual politics, but it is also another denomination that has failed to overcome the trial Jesus said would come. Jesus also said, “Watch out! You who have brought about that fall; it would have been better had you crucified yourselves rather than to suffer the judgment that will overtake you” (Matthew 18:3-11, paraphrased).

Source: Washington Times, August 22, 2009 and

Leave a comment

Posted in Church, news, politics

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Is Jesus the only way to God?

Posted on August 25, 2010 by | Leave a comment

In the post titled “Jesus & Co,” I explained (albeit, inadequately) what Jesus meant by the following passage found in the 14th chapter of John’s gospel:

“If you guys really knew me you would have known my Father also. So look here guys. You now know Him, and have seen Him.” (v.7)

I interpreted that verse to mean Jesus’ appearance, his behavior, and his work perfectly revealed God’s presence, character, and will toward humanity. Jesus assured his followers they would do likewise. Jesus based his expectations on their abiding love of God, which would perpetually motivate them to live a kingdom lifestyle. This lifestyle is characterized by behavior exemplifying the commandments of God.

In this final post on John subject, I will attempt to explain what Jesus meant by the verse prior to the one above, which is:

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me.”

Jesus’ bold statement has been a point of contention between theologians generally and between other religious faiths in particular. Most interpret it to mean Jesus is the one and only way to an afterlife in heaven with God. As such, most seem to regard it as both exclusivist and arrogant. This position of the offended seems to originate with the idea that Christianity claims that only believers in the gospel of Jesus can know God, can be accepted by God, and thus have eternal life with God.

The Christian view affirms the exclusiveness of Jesus’ statement. They have been guilty of implying that only believers in Jesus could possibly have any relationship whatsoever with God, and consequently, non-believers can not know God. This can not be true because the founders of most of the major world religions were visited by God, and the founders obviously responded positively to God. However, this does not necessarily mean those founders or their followers were or are redeemed by God. I will deal with this more later. Based on the exclusive claim of Christ, Christianity rightly claims that only those who put their faith in Jesus Christ can be assured of a place in heaven hereafter.

The basis of this audacious claim of Jesus, his apostles, and Christianity is that good works cannot and does not negate the dessert of justice for crimes (sins) committed against the laws of God.

In previous posts, it was shown that the human form resembles God’s appearance. Beyond physical appearance, we also have the capacity to imitate the moral, intellectual and creative characteristics of God. God’s issue with humanity is not appearances but with behavior. It is the our tendency practice behaviors unlike God. It is human immorality that offends God. More specifically, it is our moral crimes against the laws that is the problem.

Just as our legal system of justice–an imperfect reflection of divine justice–does not forgive people for murder, rape, abuse, oppress, steal, lie under oath, and similar criminal behaviors, neither does God. Our courts are supposed to punish crimes. That is because the rest of society must be protected from the potential harm of same criminals. So it is with the justice of God.

God is neither tolerant nor forgiving towards moral crime. The punishment for moral crime is death. As the Hebrew prophet Ezekiel wrote, “The soul that sins shall die” (Eze. 18:4). Writing to believers in Rome, Jesus’ apostle reaffirmed this truth when he stated, “The wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23). From Adam to moderns, moral crimes results in separation of mutually beneficial and productive relationships. The ultimate alienation and divorce is our separation from our Creator and benefactor, God. Therefore, no one in any religion or in no religion can be acquitted of that sentence against their sins no matter how many good works they may practice. Because committing one sin is the same as violating all moral laws, any sin results in the same way–death.

Here is a clarifying example: Joe Smoozolli brutally murders John Gonn. It was a momentary act of rage brought on my John’s harassment. Joe moves out of state and changed his to Mark de Seet. Yes, Joe was ethnically French. All of this took place twenty years ago. Since then, Joe (aka Mark) has lived a exemplary life of good charitable citizenship and business success. However, Jane Austom and her husband Eddy runs into Joe while on vacation. They remember that the police believed Joe had killed John Gonn; so they call the police. Joe is arrested the next day. A month later, he stands trial for John’s murder. The evidence against Joe is overwhelming. No jury could possibly find him not guilty. Nevertheless, a number people believe Joe should be forgiven because of his good behavior, good deeds, charitable giving, and business success. Still, Joe is guilty of murdering John. The judge cannot forgive Joe, and the jury cannot be merciful towards him because of his exemplary life. All evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Joe murdered John. The only possible verdict is guilty. Because the crime took place in Texas, the penalty is death.

Something very usual occurs during Joe’s sentencing. A business associate who also has a reputation for an exemplary life of kindness and charity and for good social works asks the court to allow himself to be executed instead of Joe. This man justifies his request on grounds that Joe has lived a humble and repentant live and because of his 4 children and wife need him. On the other hand, this man has no family needing his care and provision. His business will be sold to another. He is ready to face eternity because he is certain that he is in good standing with God. Joe, however, is not.

The only way God will accept Joe’s repentance; the only reason Joe will make it to heaven is if Joe finds out how his business associate stands accepted before God.

The answer is the sinless man Jesus was punish for the moral crimes committed by Joe, and Joe represents every human that has lived or will ever live. Because neither good works nor the death of animals in place of guilty humans are sufficient to fully satisfy divine justice, only a sinless man willing to suffer the penalty for the moral crimes of others could possibly do so. Jesus is the only person to have accomplish it. That is the claim of Jesus above: “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me.”

By Daniel Downs

Leave a comment

Posted in Bible, religion

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Why A Negative View Helps Life, Liberty and Happiness

Posted on July 3, 2010 by | 1 comment

By Daniel Downs

Some people regard political or social criticism as degradingly negative. They see being against current issues as anti-productive. According to such people, being positive is always the best policy.

Who could argue against being positive, but is just being positive really productive? Not when being positive actually means getting along with uncritical yea-sayers. What is anti-productive is mindlessly

believing what the authorities claim. The view that the professionals know best is positively negative as far as being a member of a free self-governing citizenry. How can people be freely independent while at the same time being mostly dependent on the professionals or corporate and big government institutions? It is not possible.

Put another way, if Americans vote to give government almost all of their rights, they can no longer live the American dream of independence. Consuming, voting, going just about anywhere, and feeling good about life is not the definition of freedom and independence. People can be just as happy living under socialist dictatorships, elite oligarchies, or democracies run by the same as those living under the rule of anarchism or popular federal republics.

The pursuit of happiness requires life and liberty unfettered by structured dependency whether planned by wealthy political bureaucrats, corporate executives, special interest lobbyists and their causes, or greedy speculators. After all, liberty is meaningless if life is solely in the power of the professionals or government bureaucrats. Under a regime of self-government by “We the People” justice and morality regulated for the common good is vital. Without it, a fragmented culture eventually is dominated by “divide and conquer” special interest parties.

1 Comment

Posted in Independence Day, politics

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Why I Signed the Manhattan Declaration

Posted on December 31, 2009 by | Leave a comment

By Gary Palmer

On November 20, 2009 a group of nationally known and respected Christian leaders set forth an historic declaration.

The Manhattan Declaration is a long overdue message from men and women of faith to all those in political power from state and local governments to the federal government and its myriad bureaucracies. The Declaration focuses on three foundational principles of justice and the common good on which the signers will not compromise: the sanctity of human life in all stages and conditions; the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife; and religious liberty and freedom of conscience.

The Declaration states, “Because the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage as a union of husband and wife, and the freedom of conscience and religion are foundational principles of justice and the common good, we are compelled by our Christian faith to speak and act in their defense.”

Obviously, this is a direct challenge to the power of the government at every level but especially the federal government under the current dominant liberal regime. In an interview with Katherine Lopez of the National Review, Dr. Robert George, one of the principal authors of the Manhattan Declaration, said that important decisions are now being made, or soon will be made, by state and federal government on the issues addressed in the Declaration.

Dr. George said that as a result of the 2006 and 2008 elections there is unprecedented strength in both houses of Congress and in many state legislatures to push laws that advance the abortion agenda, that seek to legalize same-sex marriage, and that threaten religious liberty. In fact, some Christian groups have already come under assault.

In May 2006, Catholic Charities of Boston ended its 103 year ministry of providing adoption services to place foster children rather than comply with the Massachusetts state law that required them to place children with homosexuals. In addition, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is threatening to take action against Belmont Abbey College, a private Catholic college in North Carolina, because the college refuses to include insurance coverage for abortion and contraception in the college’s health insurance plan.

While both of these involve Catholic institutions, they could just as easily be Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian or any other denomination.

Lopez later asked Dr. George how the White House should take the Declaration. He responded, “I hope that President Obama will understand that the signatories to the Manhattan Declaration are determined to defend the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage, and respect for religious freedom. On these issues, they cannot compromise, and they will not remain silent.”

The Declaration’s signatories understand that the principles of the sanctity of life, the sanctity of marriage and religious freedom are under threat from powerful political and cultural forces in our nation. They want it understood that, as Christians, those who sign the Declaration regard these principles as non-negotiable, and will therefore be unceasing in their defense of them. A critical line of the declaration states, “We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence.”

In explaining why he signed the Manhattan Declaration, Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky wrote that he signed it “…because I want to put my name on its final pledge — that we will not bend the knee to Caesar. We will not participate in any subversion of life. We will not be forced to accept any other relationship as equal in status or rights to heterosexual marriage. We will not refrain from proclaiming the truth — and we will order our churches and institutions and ministries by Christian conviction.”

Dr. Mohler was referring to the last lines of the Declaration that should be regarded as a solemn oath by all who sign it, “We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.” Mohler then added, “I was encouraged that we could stand together to make clear that to come for one of us on these issues is to come for all.”

The opportunity to stand with other believers of such courage and moral clarity is why I signed the Declaration.

You can read the Manhattan Declaration at www.manhattandeclaration.org.

Gary Palmer is president of the Alabama Policy Institute, a non-partisan, non-profit research and education organization dedicated to the preservation of free markets, limited government and strong families, which are indispensable to a prosperous society.

Leave a comment

Posted in Church, family, news, politics, religion

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Adventure with God to the holy city

Posted on April 26, 2009 by | Leave a comment

Deal bountifully with your servant,
That I may live and keep your word.
Open my eyes, that I may behold
Wonderful things from your law.
I am a stranger in the earth;
Do not hide your commandments
         From me.
My soul is crushed with longing
After your ordinances at all times.
You rebuke the arrogant, the cursed,
Who wander from your commandments.
(Psalms 119:17-21)

Studying the word of God is a wonderful adventure. It is a journey of exploration. The journey is not unlike the kind portrayed in Indian Jones movies. It is life-long profession that is often perilous. Overcoming the terrible obstacles means getting to and possessing the treasure. The Lost Ark is the treasure. The Ark represented the presence of God. The journey is thus both with and to God. It is a progressive relationship with our creator-redeemer-king. Inside the Ark was deposited the covenant and testimony God gave to Israel and the world. Thus the treasure deposited inside the Ark is God’s word.

As Psalms 119: 17-18 states, the treasure is more than something to gain for personal profit. It is something learned and lived while on the adventurous journey called life. It is life lived by the bounteous provision of the divine King in His kingdom. God’s kingdom encompasses our world as well as the entire universe. Nevertheless, those invited chose to enter by choice not by coercion.

The Psalmist expressed his emotional attachment to God. As above, the Psalmist’s emotional bonds to God are mediated through God’s concrete laws, testimonies, and judgments–in other words, God’s covenantal word.

As we are on the journey, we too may keenly feel like a stranger in a secular world. The secular world does not know God. Even many religious communities or nations, do not seem to know God. At least not as we experience the living God. You, I, or the Psalmist are not alone in this sense of being in a foreign land. The gospels express in great detail how Jesus not only felt this but, according to Christian teaching, he was literally from another world–from heaven. Like other acclaimed prophets, the feeling of not being of the present world is typical. The 11th chapter of Hebrews gives us a list of how many of them were treated as aliens as well. A more contemporary version of such a list is the Book of Martyrs.

As for the Psalmist, the people of God living in a world of biological and social necessities often experience periods of distraction in which they feel like souls disconnected from the life-giving Spirit. This is often described as weariness but not necessarily physiological. It can be spiritual affecting our mental state. Spiritual fatigue can create an intense longing for the renewed vitality experienced by communing with God mediated through meditation on His word. It is a moving meditation because the time spent contemplating the word results in mutual human-divine acts along the journey. Genuine relationships are always lived through mutual acts of communication and support.

That is meaning of verses 19 and 20.

However, the Psalmist is right to remember the consequences for erring from the commandments of God. Is it any different in secular society? Does breaking the law not result in suffering the penalty for doing so? Can mates violate their sacred vows of trust and loyalty without doing harm to their once mutual trust, love, and future life together? The end result is best defined as death. Death is the severance of morally bonded relationships. Can there be any worse curse than such a death? (v.21)

One reason for believing Psalm 119 was authored by King David is found in verses 22-24. Here again we read expressions of one who must have experienced injustices similar to those suffered by king David. Although anointed as king by the prophet Samuel, the same prophets who had also anointed Saul, David’s ascent to the throne was met with violent attempts to kill him. His rival was then King Saul, who had both ordered others to kill him as well as attempted it himself many times. After divine providence saw fit to end the evil reign of Saul, David was finally made king over Israel. Yet, his son, Absalom, was later to counsel with others about taking over the kingdom. Even David’s son attempted to kill the anointed one. There were leaders of other tribes and kingdoms who schemed against David as well. Yet, God’s chosen one overcame them all.

It is reasonable to conclude that these verses were part of very intensely felt prayer for help from God by David. For consider their content:

Take away reproach and contempt from me,
For I observe your testimonies.
Even though princes sit and talk against me,
Your servant meditates on your statutes.
Your testimonies are also my delight;
They are my counselors.
(Psalms 119:22-24)

Our Lord Jesus seconded David’s prayer when he proclaimed:

Blessed are you when people insult you and
Persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of
evil against you because of me. Rejoice and
be glad, for your reward in heaven is great;
for in the same way they persecuted the
prophets who were before you.

This is the last in a list of beatitudes and part of a summary of messages delivered by Jesus during his prophetic and redemptive ministry in ancient Israel. It is called a be-attitude for obvious reasons.

Because the Lord claims the sole right to vengeance for evils done against His people, we who are members of His kingdom must follow the righteous example David and Jesus. History has evidenced that both were victorious by doing justice, loving kindness, and walking humbly with God. (Micah 6:8). Whereas David was a victorious king in his time, Jesus remains victorious for all times. His victory is eternal because he perfectly and fully accomplished God will and redemptive plan without violating the moral law of God. Because the redemptive justice of God was fully satisfied through the sinless life, death and resurrection of Jesus, Jesus resign over God’s kingdom is the prize of the adventure and treacherous journey to the eternal city of God.

Unlike David, Jesus was killed but God raised him from death and made him Lord over all. God made Jesus a winner of the prize of a sinless life that accomplished redemptive justice for all humanity, or, should I say, for whomsoever will humbly accept the divine terms.

Leave a comment

Posted in Bible, religion

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,