Wednesday, November 01, 2006

The AntiThesis

"For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places." Eph. 6:12

At McMaster, this battle is so clear. Monday especially highlighted this --it was a day of extreme opposites. To give a quick sketch;
My third class, Philosophy of Law and Government, dealt with two subjects; same-sex "rights" and feminism. Her lecture was simply a flood of liberal, amoral theology and our class sat by and absorbed, like a sponge soaks up scum.
That afternoon held a one-to-one meeting with my religion professor regarding my less-than-compliant exam. Despite earlier worries, I was happily surprised –she was helpful and understanding and I was even able to share my testimony with her! The meeting was challenging as well: she pointed out many faults in Dutch circles, and left me with the challenge to learn Greek. And yet, she is a progressive scholar and consistently questions the authority of the Bible!
On my way from the meeting to a lecture, I met up with a Jewish/Zionist friend from work. As such, he tends to have a hyper-phobia of anti-Semitism and often complains of discrimination. We had a minor disagreement over one of his company slogans “in Sod we trust”, and another lady started cursing me to him. They walked off together, the discriminated now exuberantly discriminating...
But the day ended happily enough in a blessed conversation with a friend of mine :)
Where is this all going? To today: I have had yet another reprogramming/lecture on homosexual marriage, and I cannot sit quietly by.

So, if you haven’t read any of the above (it’s awfully long, sorry :P) help me on this one; how is homosexual marriage wrong and destructive, both morally and socially? Some questions that I struggle with personally;
  • Canada is no longer a Christian nation. Is it right, then, to force Christian morals on a nation that doesn’t recognize the basis of the same?
  • Is there conclusive proof of the necessity for a one-dad-one-mom family?
  • How does one respond to the “it’s their right to choose” argument?

17 comments:

Lizzi said...

Just curious, did you know some of your links don't work?

And one thing I wonder is why we have to sit around and watch Canada become an Asian culture... Maybe a little "back-to-our-roots" thinking would be good for us!

Melissa said...

"Is it right, then, to force Christian morals on a nation that doesn’t recognize the basis of the same?" I don't personally thing it is right to force Christian morals on anyone/anything, 'cause forcing isn't the way to do it.

But I know what you mean. It is really sad.

How does one respond to the “it’s their right to choose” argument?

That's hard b/c if you tell them God's idea for marriage is between adam and eve, not adam and steve, that's not gonna hold grounds for them 'cause they don't believe in God.

I dunno...that's a good question.

Gloria said...

"Is it right, then, to force Christian morals on a nation that doesn’t recognize the basis of the same?"

Wow Ruth some very hard questions to think about. Personally I think we shouldn't "force" our christian morals on anyone. But at the same time we should make it clear where we stand and why we stand there. We must always up hold the Bible No matter where you live. Don't compromise, but tell them and uphold your beliefs in a loving caring manner.

Is there conclusive proof of the necessity for a one-dad-one-mom family?

I'll think about this one for a while, before I answer.

How does one respond to the “it’s their right to choose” argument?

Oh dear, I didn't do very well debating this issue before so for the time being I'll leave this one unanswer also.

Crystal said...

to your question about if there is proof about the importance of man/woman families Focus on the Family has some resources in that direction on their web site. This is a big issue with them and they have a fair amount of evidence towards the nuclear family, man/woman not man/man or woman/woman. I think it's focusonthefamily.org.

Anonymous said...

Ruth - a Reimers friend now in Germany, here. I can only recommend sticking to what Jesus has done in YOUR life. Not that it's wrong to legislate various things, speak God's word into situations, etc, but our generation is so incredibly experiential... also, someone said to me recently, "Trust your theology." I have a lot more thinking to do on that topic, but it's an idea that I really like right now, and wanted to share with you.
-Beth in Germany

Anonymous said...

Dear Ruth,

I happened upon your 3 questions, and story to match--and couldn't leave without responding.

The first question, "As Canada is no longer a 'Christian' nation, is it right for us to 'force' our opinion upon others?"
The answer appears to be no--we must never 'force' our opinion upon others, yet that also means that we must make our truth and beliefs known, that we might not sin by compliance. In this increasingly wicked world, finding understanding is almost impossible unfortunately, but that does not prevent us from being the witness and shining light we are called to be. I'd say, if they are assaulting us with their 'stuff', can't we at least give them a kind response back? I also believe that this is highly likely to provoke persecution, but what else can a Christian do without compromising their faith?

The 2nd question, "Is there conclusive proof for the necessity for a Christian family as we have always known it?"
Aside from the Biblical evidence, which is the side we know; I believe there is quite definitely proof.
Men and women are different, which is heartily attacked by feminists and others today; yet, it can't be denied. Also, look at history; when were people the happiest in relationships? Of course, they maybe weren't 'liberated' in their thinking, yet they also didn't have to deal with terrible diseases such as AIDS, etc.
There is other definite proof as to why sodomy is wrong, yet it would generally only make sense in Christian circles.

And the 3rd question, and the best in my opinion :-), "How should we respond to their 'it's their right to choose' argument?"
Quite simply, they have no foundation to decide what a 'right' even is! We have a foundation, whose builder and maker is God. What is their foundation? Writings by fallible men, and the swings of thought in the modern era. If they say it's 'their right to choose', then we could just as well say, 'it's our right to kill them' for sinning. Or for that matter, 'our right to talk to them and tell them that it is wrong'.
When there is no basis for deciding what is right/wrong, then how can a person truly decide what IS 'right/wrong'?? Maybe a better question is, what is their basis for deciding whose 'right' it really is?
When it comes down to it, people use the 'it's their right to choose' argument, because to deny that anyone has the right to choose whatever they want without outside intervention would immediately imply they do not have control of their lives, rather that something or someone else is in control.
As such, to get them to admit so without the grace of God is nigh impossible.

I hope that all made sense :-)
I just can't stand the encroachments into Christian thinking that the world has made--that the world has successfully gotten a large number of Christians to believe that 'it's their right' when there really is no 'right' present! However, I would say we are to blame as well, for our laxity, and accepting of some things merely because they 'feel' good yet compromise us nevertheless in our testimony, hearts, and Christian life.

I trust this is of some use :-)

Sincerely,
Guess Who.

P.S. Those who know me will know who. ;-)

P.S.2 I shortened the response to Q #2 and Q #3 for the sake of time. With Q #2, much more could be said, yet increasingly it all points to the fact, that without God, man is totally lost in purpose and aim.
Q #3, I addressed one main group of the world, so don't worry if it appears to be rather one-sided in a certain direction. Time for addressing more isn't really here. :)

Anonymous said...

Incidentally, I also found a nice link here: http://www.biblebelievers.com/jmelton/sodom.html
There are lots of other links, and there was even one very interesting site by totally non-Christians who were proving that the premise of 'sodomy being wrong' led to the elimination of all the modern philosophical theories they analyzed!
Does that say something about why people hold to that false idea with hook, line, and sinker?

As regards other links, I don't recommend them. :-( That first one was pretty much enough for me, as researching this stuff can get rather... awful. In the absence of God, there is definitely NO grace.

Sincerely,
Guess Who.

Ruth said...

Wow, thanks everyone for all your help! Most encouraging but you leave me with a lot of homework to do :P

Crystal, there are many most tempting articles on family.org but I can’t access them :S It did reference another most helpful site --http://www.marriageunderfire.com/arguments.aspx. More on that later :)

Beth, in postmodernism, experiential evidence is invaluable. Two difficulties arise, however; a. it’s entirely relative (as same-sex evidence is) and b. not being a homosexual, my experience can potentially be discarded altogether... if that makes sense. :S

“Guess who”, I particularly liked your “rights” argument –so true! Without any standard beyond relativism, what is a right anyways? If Adam’s belief system centers around self-gratification, how can Joe Relativist deny Adam’s “right to murder”? The onus is really on Joe to provide a basis for rights, and a standard to govern rights… which he will be unable to do. And no, I have NO idea who you are :) Steve D. maybe? Do I even know you? :)

Amy said...

I know who . . . :) And thanks for raising the question, Ruth! I had to deal a lot with this in public high, and I struggled a lot with it, because all I could do was tell them that I believed that God created us to be male and female and to complement and fit together perfectly. It's a beautiful thing, and anyone can see that homosexuality is not the "natural" thing that we were created for. I told them that there is hope for those enslaved in this lifestyle, just as there is hope for people to stop smoking. Both are harmful. I actually had a friend who was homosexual, and he was very nice about it, but disagreed with me.

Just remember, Ruth, that you can win a debate, but facts will never change the heart. That's something I have to learn over and over again. Ultimately, what matters isn't their sexuality! Eternity matters, and if the heart is changed, the actions will be as well.

Keep sharing your faith! Glad you are speaking out!!

Guess Who. said...

Well, I thought I had better clarify before people started thinking I'm not who I am. :-) I've met you once Ruth that I recall--Ethan Neff, cousin of the Reimers.

Glad to hear you enjoyed all the responses to your original posting!
Sincerely,
Et

P.S. Amy, I really think you were mistaken. And to be even more exact, I believe I have no idea who YOU are! :-)

Amy said...

Okay, maybe not . . . a few phrases really sounded like . . .

Ralph said...

Hi Ruth,

I think the only way that you can effectively argue against them is by pointing out their presuppositions and double-standards. For example, in regards to your question "Is it right to force Christian morals on a nation..." one could start by pointing out that all legislation is a forcing of morals on someone else. Ask, it is right for s to force their morals on the nation? And, who defines right and wrong anyway (and since when did you believe there was such a thing as right and wrong)? etc etc

Check out this link to see how Tristan Emmanuel deals with these types of questions effectively on national media at:
http://www.ecpcentre.org/p-tv.php

Mark R said...

*sigh of contentment*

I'm so glad I don't feel too compelled to complete the comment that I started 6 days ago...

but

Yes, Ethan, thanks for being so concise about the issue of right and wrong. A huge double standard usually is overlooked when someone says they have a right to choose for themselves and then turn around a say there are some things that should still be illegal. Why, for example do many of those same people oppose the death penalty--which, in my experience, since there are practical reasons for and against, it usually comes down to "moral conviction" that this is state sponsored murder. My answer is "what is murder and why would it be wrong?" Stupid question to most, but really it is not if they believe we get to decide for ourselves what is right and wrong... Carried through to pure relativism, they presuppose
(whether intentionally or unintentionally I don't know) that there can be to contradicting "right" answers to the moral and ethical questions we pose in society. And they accuse us of blind faith, and forcing our "irrational" ideas on them?!!

All we really should ask of the unbeliever is for them to accept the fact that if one of us is "right" the other is necessarily WRONG! If the tree is dead, it can't also be alive at the same time.

When "great minds" they find that none of their substitute dogmas work in their search for truth, the just deny that there is truth.

This all fits nicely with what Ralph said: all legislation and law is an imposition of morals. Out of love for our neighbor we should be voting and doing what we can in the political arena because we believe our dogma is “true truth,” and more importantly, the church needs to admit fault and preach the word more faithfully...

I believe it was Horatius Bonar who asserted quite forcefully in an essay--(I don't recall the title) We can't expect sanctification without regeneration and salvation.

Gotta run...

Rebekah said...

Gah! Ruth, I have been struggling with these very same issues for some time. Thanks for voicing them so I can get the benefit of your responces! :)

Anonymous said...

I love what Amy said, and this is where I was trying to go with my comment on sharing experientially - that standing up for truth is invaluable and necessary, but that hearts respond more readily to personal stories of Christ in our lives than data and statistics. : -Beth

regardless - good for you, Ruth

Ruth said...

Beth, I agree wholeheartedly with you. I think our only difference is the contexts we are addressing :) BTW, do you have a blog? I'd love to see it!

Kristi said...

Okay, this is just for encouragement--I know it won't help in debate: :)

We win. In Christ and His word we hold fast to HIS standard of righteousness and holiness for living...the world will not understand--even when logic and reason is on our side like it is. Go forth with joy and confidence girl! By all means, be faithful to the Giver of intellect and do your homework on these issues(i.e. keep doing what you are doing).

Also, NO ONE in this post-modern age can deny you your own living testimony as a child of God, living in obedience to Him.
Real life examples are quite powerful.

Praying for you!