Does Being Updated = Being Reformed When It Comes To The Problem With Sex?

 The subject of today's review is an interview that the TableTalk Magazine people had with Rev Chris Gordon (click here and look for the information on Rev. Christ Gordon). The subject of the interview was Rev. Gordon's was his recently published catechism on Human Sexuality (click here for the interview and there for information on Rev. Gordon's catechism). In writing that catechism, Rev Gordon was following in the Reformed tradition of using catechisms to teach what is regarded as true.

In the interview, Rev. Gordon expresses a more than appropriate concern with how Christians, especially those who of school age, are responding to the changing views that our culture has on sex and gender identity. Here we should note that unbiblical sexual desires are strong and alluring enough for us even if we lived in convents where it seems that everything that hasn't been considered in the past, goes. And so when we add to that peer pressure and other influences, we see the need for Christian resources that help us to establish what God has said in His word about sexual orientation and gender identity.

At the same time, after reading through the interview and looking at how Rev. Gordon has borrowed a method from the distant pass to communicate what we need to know, one has to wonder whether the past has too much of a hold on some of Rev. Gordon's ideas.

Rev. Gordon is rightly concerned over the compromises he sees many Christians making regarding sexual behavior and gender identity. We should all be so concerned. We should also be wary because we are not approaching this subject as an unaffected bystander. Rather, most, if not all, of us face many of the same pressures and temptations to compromise Biblical standards accommodate our sexual desires and gender identities. And some of us also face the confusion and temptation of gender dysphoria. For example, a friend of mine confided in me that she knew of an adult person in her church who was transitioning.

So what does Rev. Gordon tell us about in the interview besides the need for Christian sources to help us fend off our temptations?

The fact that Rev. Gordon is using a catechism to convey these truths tell us about the ties to the past that he has. In the movie, 13 Days, we hear President Kennedy talking about how, in WW I, yesteryear's tactics were being used to fight a then modern war filled with new technologies that made the mass killing of soldiers easier. It's not that Rev. Gordon should not have written his catechism to address the issue of the new and increased sexual temptations we face because of the current sexual revolution, it is that this is apparently Rev. Gordon's only approach to the problems we are facing. This points to my view of one the problems that traditionalists have: they rely too much on the past to interpret and respond to the present.

Next, we should take special note of the following quote from Rev. Gordon

Who we are as image bearers of God is not to be defined by our sinful desires.

Who we are and how we are defined is more complicated than is recognized by God's redeeming work in us. Why? It is because despite God's wonderful work of redemption, we will, until we die our earthly death, be both a redeemed saint and a sinner. As James said, we all stumble in many ways and will continue to do so until the end. Here,  we should be reminded of how great Reformed saints from the past stumbled in terms of racism. People like Jonathan Edwards and J. Gresham Machen held racist views. Rev. Billy Graham, who was not reformed, gave evidence of also having a problem with racism (click here and there) though maybe not to the same degree.

We Christians will have at least two identities for as long as we live this life. We are redeemed in Christ and made new creatures. But we will also be sinners like the tax collector from the parable of the two men praying (Luke 18:9-14). To deny the former identity denies the work of Christ in us. To deny the latter identity of being a sinner means that we no longer need to confess our sins and beg for God's mercy. To deny the latter identity is to embrace the identity of the Pharisee from that parable.

The denying of specific instances of the latter identity has become a controversy in some Reformed churches. Side B Christians, for example are now prohibited from holding in church offices in the PCA Church. A Side B Christian is a person who struggles with Same Sex Attraction (SSA) but remains celibate. The rationale for such a prohibition is the unfair and inconsistent expectation that some of the old guard in the PCA have with Side B Christians as not giving enough credit to God's grace for changing them. 

Rev. Gordon seems to see the cause for homosexuality is sin and only sin. In addition, Rev. Gordon takes a Genesis 1:27 approach to gender identity. That God has created us male and female with nothing in between. The problem is that some are born as being indeterminant in terms of being male and female. And there are a number of physical causes for this condition. That means that while Gordon sees people as being either male are female, there is a small percentage of people who are truly neither male or female, but that they have parts of both biological sexes in them. Such people are classified as being intersex. 

In addition, for some who experience gender dysphoria, they happen to have the kind of brain structure, and yes there is a male structured brain and a female one, that belongs not to the biological sex they were assigned to, but to the biological sex of the gender they are identifying as.

And thus, what we are hearing from some scientists is that if we must have a binary classification of sex, it isn't a discrete one where one is either male or female but not both. Instead, we have people who have characteristics of both sexes.

Recognizing more than 2 biological sexes by counting intersex as a biological sex or by recognizing that some, though legitimately classsified as either a male or female still have parts of them that belong to the other gender should have been addressed in Gordon's catechism.

Likewise regarding sexual orientation, there are many species in which Same-Sex Behavior (SSB) has been witnessed. For some species, SSB contributes to the well being of the species. Since we don't attribute such behavior in animals to sin, it would seem that there are at least some biological factors that contribute to SSB in animals. And that is with animals, it is certainly not unreasonable to accept the possibility that at least for some people, SSA is due to some biological factors.

Its not that this scientific information should cause us to compromise biblical standards, but such information  should at least change our tone when speaking to those in the LGBT community about the biblical standards for sex and gender identity. In other words, updating our knowledge about sexual orientation and gender identity can cause us to reform our approach to those in the LGBT community without necessarily changing our standards.

In addition, none of this information about those with SSA or gender dysphoria contradicts Genesis 1:27 as some fear or anticipate it would. That is because while Genesis 1:27 is stated before Adam's sin and the fall of man, nature also fell when Adam's sinned.

But, from the interview, it seems that Rev. Gordon is either unaware of the possible physical causes to SSA and gender dysphoria, or he thinks that such information is irrelevant. That because he has the Scriptures, the only way to respond to SSA and gender dysphoria is to quote the Scriptures about sinful desires.

All of that leads us back to a trait that Rev. Gordon shares with the same previously mentioned weakness of traditionalists: they rely too much on the past to interpret and respond to the present. And so there is no updating for traditionalists. And because there is no updating for them, there is no reforming them either.

Comments Which Conservatives Block On Their Blogs For August 24, 2022

 Aug 17

To Stephen Spinnenweber and his article about how desires for same-sex relations are significantly more sinful that desires for unbiblical heterosexual relations. This appeared in Heidelblog.

The problem that some Christian traditionalists have is that they are either literally or virtually  substituting their pet traditions for the Scriptures. And that is what we see in the above article. Not once did the writer appeal to the Scriptures when discussing the issue concupiscence, not once. Rather, the appeals are made to some Reformed standards as if they were as canonical as the Scriptures are.

Another problem is that the above discussion shows little understanding of same-sex attraction and nature. Certainly we must agree with Paul when he states in Romans 1 that homosexuality goes against nature. But we need to be more precise there. Homosexuality goes against nature as God designed it. But since we see bisexuality in over 1,000 species of animals, what do we really know about what nature is saying to each individual person. What we see in the animal kingdom shows that nature has fallen from its original design. And so when someone claims that it is nature that has determined their sexual orientation or gender identity, that might very well be true, even though it provides no excuse before God. But since we are all subject in varying ways to a fallen nature, we need to be extremely careful in how we apply the nature argument to sexual issues. Here, we need to err on the side of compassion.

Finally, whether desires for unbiblical same-sex relations are worse than desires for unbiblical heterosexual relations depends on the context. After all, since both are sins, there is no significant difference when talking about whether one has sexual sins. Nor is there a significant difference between the two when the context is God's final judgment. But how should the difference between the two desires dictate how we treat fellow Christians or regard ourselves in the Church in terms of how much we can participate? There is not answer explicit answer to that question in the above article.  But that article seems to be based on a specific issue; with a particular agenda. Therefore, the general way in which concupiscence is discussed in the above article is really unhelpful. It can promote a lot of unfair and unfounded treatments of fellow believers who might be struggling with unbiblical sexual desires or gender dysphoria. The writer needs to write the above article with a specific application in mind in order to avoid encouraging Christians to respond wrongly to the differences that exist between desiring unbiblical same-sex relations and desiring unbiblical heterosexual relations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Sir Roger Scruton and his blogpost praised Western Civilization and tried debunk criticisms of it. This appeared in the Imaginative Conservative blog.

If we judge any civilization by how it  treats its own, one could make a case for many civilizations to be on par with Western Civilization. Of course the same case could have been made for Nazi Germany while it was winning WW II. And this is where Gandhi's famous quote about Western Civilization comes in to play. In responding to a reporter's question about what he thought of Western Civilization, Gandhi said in response: 'I think it would be a good idea.'

Perhaps Gandhi was thinking of what Frederick Douglas wrote about what July 4th meant to the slave when he gave that response:

What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are, to Him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy—a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of the United States, at this very hour.

Whose view of celebrating July 4th should have held sway then? Was it the white citizens of America because what America had done for them or was it the slave's view of America because of what America had done to them? Perhaps what Jesus said in Matthew 5:43-47 could answer the question:

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?

Now the odd thing about using Jesus's quote here is that the quote would seem to apply to them more than the white audience who were listening to Douglas speak. After all, while they were not the enemy of America's part of Western Civilization, America's part of Western Civilization was an enemy to them. So think about what Jesus's quote would mean to America's part of Western Civilization back then

And while there is no slavery today, there is still systemic racism, abuse, and exploitation  of people of color inside our borders while there is militarization, exploitation, and dependence on both the rule of force and tyrants outside of them. As for the European part, there is still dependence on results of past colonialism and both the rule of force and foreign tyrants for its welfare.  Though we should add that the European sector of Western Civilization seems to have fewer old bad habits within their own borders  than the American sector.

We can't judge a civilization without looking at all of its most significant relationships. And so when we look at how Western Civilization related to its outsiders and marginalized people, Western Civilization is found sorely wanting.. And it is only a fragile ego that seeks to compensate for its self-doubts by so easily praising itself in the light of its history of how it treated others.

But heck, if some here must be praised to feel good about themselves, there are no words that could be said which could give them reason for pause in celebrating themselves and their heritage.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To J.F. Solís for the part of his article that was quoted in Heidelblog which mocks Greg Johnson for talking about the struggles that same-sex attracted Christians have in living the Christian life.  This part of Solís's article was quoted in a heidelblog post.

Besides the fact that the article cited comes from a very rigid Roman Catholic view of both sex and celibacy, we should note that what was quoted shows the writer's disdain for and disgust with people like Greg Johnson. So what if Johnson's claim about gay celibate Christians having given up 'everything the world values' is just a little bit of an overstatement. What is at the heart of the matter is the struggle that same-sex attracted Christians have over a part of our lives that produces one of the strongest grips on thinking and behavior of all of us: sex. So while Solís, because of his rigid thinking, mocks Johnson by saying that indeed the world does not value sodomy, the real issue is that what the world very much values is not sodomy per se, but sexual intimacy. And why Solís did not pick up on that is both a bit shocking but not mysterious.

What the article cited as well as Heidelblog, which quoted this particular part of the article, are demonstrating here is a fear and perhaps even hatred for those from the LGBT community, especially those who claim to be Christians. And this is where we need to warn Solís, Heidelblog, and those who could favorably relate to Solís's views about the lessons to be learned from the parable of the two men praying (Luke 18:9-14). If we are always in such desperate need for God's mercy, as Reformed Theology teaches us,  and if, as James mentions in the second chapter of his epistle, that we need to show mercy rather than judgment because we are all lawbreakers, which is a point that Paul also made in Romans 2, then this distain for, disgust with, fear and hatred for those Christians who are struggling with their sexuality goes against the grain of believing the Gospel. Yes, sexual purity as defined by the Scriptures is essential for each Christian and in the Church. But so is treating all fellow believers with the same grace and mercy that God continually shows us in Christ.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aug 18

To Leila Miller for the part of her article that was quoted in Heidelblog which warned us not to be fooled by people who are nice but might be giving us wrong theology. 

Leila Miller's full article can be found at:

https://www.crisismagazine.com/2022/dont-be-fooled-by-nice

One doesn't have to believe what a friendly nice person says to you to appreciate their warmth. Genuine warmth should always be celebrated regardless of what they are saying.

My fear is that in trying to avoid overestimating being nice, too many fellow Reformed Christians fail to understand the fruit of the spirit and the charge to correct people with gentleness because of our own weaknesses and failures.

Comments Which Conseratives Block From Their Blogs For February 9, 2022

Feb 4

To R. Scott Clark and his blogpost article on how strictly an officer in the conservative Reformed and Presbyterian denominations hold to the standard confessions and catechisms such as the Westminster Standards. This appeared in Heidelblog.

From my conversations with people, there is wider disagreement with the Standards than are are outwardly expressed. Here we should note that despite the fact that no one is holding a literal gun to their heads to keep them silent. But how many non-literal guns can exist in this context?

However, the key issue that revolves around strict subscription to the Standards is left unmentioned in the article above. Mark 7 touches on that issue. At what point does a required subscription to the Standards make a group like the Pharisees from  that chapter in Mark? Jesus rightfully accused the Pharisees of substituting their traditions for the Scriptures. That occurred when they placed  their traditions on too high a pedestal. 

So, in essence, the Westminster Standards are to us what the traditions of the Pharisees were to them. And the more strict subscription to those standards is required, the more it reveals the pedestal on which we have placed those standards. And the question becomes for us, how much do we want to imitate the Pharisees in substituting something man-made for what was God-breathed? 

BTW, at least those who first defined Christian Fundamentalism in order to distinguish authentic Christianity from liberal theology stuck to a small, and rightfully selected,  number of  essentials.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The comment below is based on the 2nd audio clip on the webpage.

To W. Robert Godfrey and his recorded adult class lesson on how the abandoning of Christendom has some very negative marks on the world today. This appeared in the Abounding Grace Radio blog. 

Regarding Godfrey's lesson, the problem is that while Godfrey speaks to the recent disorientation of Christians to a world that is changing from revolving around Christendom to another view of reality. But the problem is that not all have experienced Christendom as something positive. The LGBT community has been harshly persecuted under Christendom. In America, Christendom promoted white supremacy. In the world, Christendom justified colonialism and imperialism. In Europe, there were religious wars and harsh religious persecutions. Under Christendom, women had to live as 2nd class citizens in America for a long time. And reversals to these abuses and atrocities are not being associated with the promotion of Christendom but with the abandoning of Christendom. And so while Christians are experiencing disorientation because of the changing of the guard in terms of how the world and life are interpreted, others are experiencing some levels of liberation with the end of Christendom.

And while Godfrey uses Stalin to show the negative implications of what Marx said, he neglected the details that show that Stalin was not a Marxist. And for all of Marx's faults and errors, what Godfrey attributes to Marx ain't necessarily so. Similarly, Hitler is not the logical result of abandoning Christendom especially when his anti-Semitism was, in large part, a result of centuries of European Christian anti-Semitism. After all, today we see a post Christian Europe that is far different in positive ways than what we saw when it was under Christendom.

Yes, a lot of today's thinking is horrible and threatening. But if we ignore the bad fruits that our religious ancestors produced through Christendom, we will not see  Christianity's, and by Christianity I am referring to Christians, contributions to today's bad fruit and thus we will have no credibility when challenging the current ways of the world.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The comment below is based on the 1st audio clip on the webpage..

Feb 5

To Chris Gordon and his adult Church lesson on sexuality in which he addresses homosexuality and gender identity. This appeared in the Abounding Grace Radio blog.

It's not that Chris Gordon's answers to the sexual orientation and gender identity issues of today are wrong,  it is that by sticking solely with the Heidelberg Catechism and the Scriptures, he has a turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to many of the struggles people are experiencing with these issues. He is basically saying that while he doesn't need to listen to the life experiences of people whose sexual orientation and gender identity are unbiblical, but they need to listen to him. And that serves somewhat of a microcosm of the Conservative Church's response to people today.

BTW, life tells us that there are more than 2 biological sexes today. Those who are born as intersex comprise another biological sex. And the problem there is that because of the percentage of people who are born that way, many of us conservative Christians want to think as if that does not happen. That is our preference until one knows someone or has a friend who is intersex and has listened to the problems they face.

In terms of gender identity, it seems that many in the LGBT community and many conservatives who feel anxious by the presence of those from that community share the same fault; they conflate biological sex with gender identity. While the former is a physical, biological reality, the other is a psycho-social reality. In addition, while we know somewhat of what nature says based on the outward evidence of one's biological sex, we don't know what nature is saying on the inside. And since the biological reality of our sex and our gender identity are not identical, we need to recognize the complexity of the issue of one's gender identity. Here it might be useful to study the Native American tribes that recognized up to 5 genders, though those gender identities are not necessarily parallel to what we see in our culture today, and they honored those who held to a different gender identity than what they were born with as people whose spirit conquered their flesh. BTW, the triumph of the Spirit over the flesh is something we celebrate from a different perspective.

In addition, what many people are referring to when they speak of liberation today is the liberation from society's attempts to marginalize them for their differences. And American Christianity, in contrast to how Rosaria Butterfield's pastor friend treated her, has played a prominent role in promoting harsh attempts at marginalizing people from the LGBT community by society.

As for sexual orientation, here we should note the prevalence of homosexuality in the animal kingdom. So what is nature telling us about homosexuality, and for many, their sexual preferences?

Finally, we should note that when Paul condemns homosexuality in Romans 1, he follows that up with the stern warning not to judge others in Romans 2. Why? It is because we believers in God can identify with those sinning unbelievers from Romans 1 because of our own sins. And so we should be describing this issues not as observers who are reluctantly and from a distance viewing  horrible acts of some alien species, but as fellow sinners. We should also note that we have multiple identities. We have a new identity in Christ, but we still have an identity with the tax collector from the parable of the 2 men praying. We can easily identify with that tax collector unless, of course, we prefer to find our identity with the Pharisee from that same parable.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Feb 5

To R. Scott Clark and Brad Isabell for Clark's quoting of Isabell's article on the riff between the Side B Movement and the traditionalists in the PCA over church participation by those Christians in the Side B Movement. Clark quotes part of Isabell's article in his blogpost on Heidelblog.

Isabell's full article can be found at:

   https://www.reformation21.org/blog/a-word-on-narratives

I've commented on this before here. It seems that there are errors made by both sides on the issue of whether being SSA but celibate disqualifies a person fr0m serving as.a church officer. Overtures #23 and #37 certainly introduce a hierarchy between heterosexuals and homosexuals who don't act on unbiblical desires. And a contributing motivation for that hierarchy could be homophobia for sure. But that's could be and so assuming support for those overtures implies homophobia is wrong and an overreaction.

At the same time, one must understand the historical context for such an accusation. There are people who are emerging from centuries of societal marginalization of homosexuals. Defensiveness and a hyper level of oversensitivity are normal reactions to long standing social injustices and persecution. And the normality of those reactions is often hidden when people are so wrapped up in their theology that they forget what it means to be a person. After all, theology is not substitute for experience; rather, it is to provide an important aid in how we structure and interpret our experiences. Unfortunately, some believe otherwise.

Instead of a peaceful and Biblical resolution to the debate, there will be nothing more than continued strife, the demonization of others,  and self-righteous posturing by those on both sides unless both sides realize their own errors and the unbiblical way in which they are reacting to others.

The Battle Within The PCA

 There is a battle going on in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). That battle is over the roles that homosexuals can have in the Church. Though I am not a member of a PCA church, I am a member of a church in a similar denomination, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC). The seminary I went to provides ministers for both denominations and both denominations rely heavily on the Westminster Confessions and Catechisms as well as a few other likeminded confessions for their extra Biblical sources for the doctrines they teach and hold their office holders accountable to conform to.

This battle in the PCA isn't the same as previous battles over homosexuality in some of the mainline denominations. Those previous battles were over allowing homosexuals to be ministers and allowing churches in those denominations to perform same-sex weddings. Rather, the battle is over whether celibate men who identify themselves as same-sex attracted (SSA), homosexual, or gay can hold offices in the PCA churches. These men are celibate because they understand the inconsistency that exists in participating in homosexual relationships and what the Scriptures say. Thus they refrain from participating in such relationships. But even there, there is some diversity in those who are identifying as being SSA.

We are covering that issue here because the PCA is considering two overtures that address this issue. We will be review pertinent parts of the overtures #23 (click here) and #37 (click here). In particular, we will be focusing on the statement that starts at line #33 on page 1 of Overture #23 and the statement that starts at line #25 on page 1 of Overture #37.

The statement in question from Overture #23 says the following:

Whereas the Christian’s identity is rooted in Christ so that he is a “new creation” in Him, his identity cannot be defined by sexual and/or any other desires or lifestyles that are contrary to Holy Scripture; for the Christian there is a clear distinction between self- conception (“this is who I am”) and remaining indwelling sin (“this is what I must daily mortify”) (Rom. 6:1–14; I Cor. 6:9–11; II Cor. 5:17; Col. 3:1–5); and

The statement in question from Overture #37 says the following:

Whereas the Christian’s identity is rooted in Christ so that he is a “new creation” in Him, his identity cannot be defined by any desires or lifestyles that are contrary to the Holy Scripture; for the Christian there is a clear distinction between self-conception (“This is who I am”) and remaining indwelling sin (“This is what I must daily mortify”) (Rom. 6: 1-14; 1 Cor. 6: 9-11; 2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 2:20; Col. 3:1-5); and 

At issue here is how those struggling with SSA identify themselves. And this is where things get complicated. This 'identifying' oneself as is a relatively new expression. What is meant by it? According to one source, to identify oneself as a particular gender is to see 'one's most innermost concept of oneself as being a male or female. Thus, when it comes to sexual orientation, to identify as being SSA or gay is for a man to state that, in his innermost being, he is attracted to those of the same sex.

Now the problem with the Scriptures listed in the above statements from the overtures is that the Scriptures never use that word 'identify' when discussing one's relationship with Christ or seeing oneself as a new creation. Thus, when those statements insert the word 'identify,' they are estimating that the Scriptures cited are dealing roughly with the same concepts used when people identify themselves as being of a particular gender or having a give sexual orientation. Those Scriptures, however, are clear; that a Christian's, let alone an officeholder in a church, innermost way of seeing oneself is as someone whom Christ has recreated. That would seem to support Overtures #23 and #37. 

However, those statements of us Christians having become new creations and having killed fleshly desires are interspersed with Scriptural statements telling us to put away the old ways and mortify our fleshly desires. And thus there is some ambiguity in the Scriptures as to where we are as people who belong to Christ. We have both done away with and continue to battle sinful desires.

But furthermore, there is another Scripture that also speaks to our innermost being as people and how we identify ourselves. That Scripture is Luke 18:9-14 (click here to read the passage). For if we only view ourselves as having killed our fleshly desires, then we cannot identify ourselves as being the tax collector from that passage one time. We can only then identify ourselves as being the Pharisee. But it is the Pharisee who is condemned while the tax collector is saved in that parable.

And that brings us to a crucial part of the issue brought up by Overtures #23 and #37. That part is whether officeholders in the Church and the rest of us Christians can have more than one identity. That rather than being simple because we are new creations, are we complicated and complex people whose core being is that of being both a new creation and worst of sinners? Here we should note that tax collectors were seen as being one of the worst, if not the worst sinner, which is why Jesus used the tax collector as is example to compare with the Pharisee.

Seeing our identity as being complex and complicated could speak against Overtures #23 and #37. That is because if a celibate man identifies as both gay or SSA and Christian, is he not being honest then about the complexity of his identity and sharing a struggle in the battle that all Christians have though we do not all share the same sinful desires.

There are other complications over whether the PCA should pass these overtures. One of those issues involve those Christians who are celibate but, because they believe that nature made them this way, that their desires are not sinful in and of themselves so that they have not sexually sinned unless they carry out those desires. Overtures #23 and #37 correctly speak against that belief. For if even looking at a woman lustfully is counted as adultery according to Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew, then how are same-sex desires not also sinful?

There is another issue that complicates things over the PCA's decision whether it should adopt Overtures #23 and #37. That issue comes from the statement starting on line 39 on page 1 of Overture #23. That statement says the following:

Whereas the sexual revolution and LGBTQ+ movement are infiltrating many quarters of the Church and causing no small amount of confusion; and

That statement shows not the issues that the individual Christian is battling, but a major fear that conservative denominations like the PCA are experiencing. That fear is whether the PCA, on a case by case basis, will decide whether allowing a Christian man who also identifies as being gay or SSA is honestly sharing his struggle or whether allows such a Christian to hold office is opening the door for those not struggling with their sinful desires to become members and officers in the churches of that denomination. Here we should note that that fear becomes a phobia when the PCA either feels that it either cannot or refuses to even try to tell the difference between those Christian applicants for offices who are honestly sharing the battles they have with sinful desires from those who are not. 

The homosexual issue has caused great division in the Church in America. And that division, in part, is due to the role conservative Christian leaders and churches have played. For those leaders who and churches that oppose equality for the LGBT community in society, not in the church, have put its younger members into the dilemma of choosing which sin they must accept: the marginalizing, or persecuting, of those in the LGBT community or viewing homosexuality in ways that are contrary to how the Scriptures portray it. Overtures #23 and #37 just might be putting the PCA churches and members in a similar position when it comes to how it views Christians who identify as being gay or SSA but who are celibate.

Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For June 19, 2019

June 15

To R. Scott Clark and his blogpost warning parents not to let their children be educated by TV. One of the reasons for his warning is that Hollywood will corrupt our children’s minds by having us accept homosexuality as normal rather than as the mental illness Clark says it is. This appeared in Heidelblog.

Cited article:   https://www.agradio.org/why-you-should-not-let-hollywood-catechize-your-children.html

The above post and the article from which it quotes goes well beyond the Scriptural description of homosexuality as being sinful and against as we are created to be (Romans 1). And there are two interesting observations to bring up here. First, homosexuality should not surprise in the unbelieving world. That was part of Paul's point in Romans 1 and we should note that what was normal and abnormal before the fall have, in some cases, switched places. Second, there are heterosexual sins that are considered to be worse than homosexuality. Whereas Romans 1 depicts a scene where homosexuality should not surprise us in the unbelieving world, having sex with one's step-mom (I Cor 5) should surprise us according to Paul.

With pride, Clark claims, and quite falsely so, that there is no unambiguous science that would challenge the pre-1793 DSM categorization that homosexuality is a mental illness--this is where Clark goes beyond the Scriptures and gives ground for the hatred and following marginalization of homosexuals. We should note that Clark doesn't cite any scientific study that supports the classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder. Clark seems unaware of how some Native American tribes saw 3 to 4 different genders among their people and they didn't marginalize them as Clark seems to desire for us to do. Neither does Clark  even mention the fact that homosexuality has having played a beneficial role in approximately 1,500 species (see https://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx ).

While pointing to the changes in the 1973 DSM categories, even there he make serious mistakes. First, DSM did not completely eradicate homosexuality from DSM until 1987. Second, Clark is not honest is acknowledging that previous DSM classification of homosexuality as a mental illness could have easily been due more to Christianity's influence on society and the scientific community rather than scientific study (see  https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hide-and-seek/201509/when-homosexuality-stopped-being-mental-disorder and https://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_mental_health.html ). And while Clark states that the change in the 1973 DSM classifications were due to political pressure by the gay community, the APA put the issue up to a vote where 5,854 Psychiatrists voted to remove homosexuality from DSM while 3,810 voted to retain it. And despite that approaching a 2-1 ratio to remove that classification of homosexuality, the APA relied on a compromise solution by replacing homosexuality with a category for those in personal conflict over their sexual preferences. And of course, none of that includes the scientific evidence that attributes homosexuality to DNA and 'nonsocial environmental factors' (see  https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1529100616637616 ).

Of course there is scientific evidence that points more to social factors as causing homosexuality. But in either case, the issue of mental illness and homosexuality is not mentioned.  In fact, more recent studies refute the connection between homosexuality and mental illness (see  https://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_mental_health.html ).

In Clark's articles, he goes way beyond the clear Scriptural mandates against homosexuality to that of inflating the differences between homosexuality and heterosexuality to the extent that Christian readers of his articles can easily be encouraged to first fear homosexuals and then, out of that fear, hate homosexuals. That hatred may not come across with verbal or physical violence, but it can easily come across in believers attempting to marginalize homosexuals with or without the help of legislation.

Yes, we must clearly preach that the Scriptures speak against homosexuality. But if we go beyond what the Scriptures say on the matter, not only will we be hurting innocent people in society, including homosexuals, we will put Post Modernism Christians who rightly oppose the marginalization of homosexuals in society into a dilemma of either accepting or rejecting what the Scriptures say about homosexuality. Many Millennial Christians have begun to reject what the Scriptures say to avoid the sin of marginalizing homosexuals. And even non-Millennial Christians, like Nicholas Wolterstorff, have joined them.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

June 18

To Stanley Schwartz and his blogpost that opposes new rent regulations passed by the NY State legislature. One way in which Schwartz describes those regulations is as an attack on economic liberty. This appeared in the Acton blog.
Reading the article leads one to believe that any regulations over those who rent property to others would stifle the ability of those owners from making improvements on their rental properties and thus these owners never make any significant profits from their properties. At least that is what one is led to believe. But I suspect that case-by-case studies on those who rent properties to others might reveal something different.


The principle laid out in the article above is that the NY legislature should not put regulations on those who rent properties to others because that infringes on their economic freedom. And thus, it logically follows that Schwartz's is arguing that the NY legislature, or in fact all legislatures, should only represent the interests of owners, not of the other stakeholders. So while the legislature represents owners only,  the rest rely not on democracy but on those benevolence of those owners . So it is Democracy for owners but not for the rest of us. Something similar occurs when the idea of workplace regulations or environmental regulations passed by legislatures are portrayed as enemies of economic liberty. The message being passed is that  our government is to represent only those with wealth while it leaves the rest of us to live by the benevolence of those with wealth.

It isn't that all regulations are good. But regulations in principle are valid. And thus any examination over the validity of regulations must be made on case-by-case basis only lest only the wealthy among us enjoy living in a democracy--and I think that the lest is what the founding fathers intended in a nation when only white male landowners could vote during the writing of The Constitution.

Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blocs For November 2, 2016

Oct 28

To Joe Carter and his blogpost that proposes that conservatives could control the Supreme Court through a Democratic administration by having Congress change the size of the Supreme Court. This appeared in the Gospel Coalition.

Considering that the criteria conservatives use to determine whether a judge is an activist judge depends on whether they agree with any judgment made by that judge, this argument of controlling SCOTUS by lowering the number justices is rather petty.

We simply don't understand what is involved in changing the nation from being pro-choice to being pro-life. We don't understand because not enough people are consistently pro-life. Thus, the actual pro-life base is not big enough to establish and win arguments where those arguments are most important: in the street.

When abortion was illegal, its status changed because of the number of ordinary people who still sought abortions. And since our prisons are already overcrowded and the number of doctors to provide healthcare is marginal, changing the law to criminalize abortion at this point in time can bring damaging unwanted consequences as well as could be unproductive to the pro-life cause. And considering the damage that is already caused by pro-life advocates excusing our exploitive economic system, our deadly foreign polices, and our way of life that continues to damage the environment, we need to find ways that bolster pro-life credentials before we depend on changes in the law.

In addition, this proposal of changing the size of the Supreme Court is such a temporary fix that it risks making the size of the Supreme Court a kind of ping pong issue which could constantly be changed with each changing of the guard in Congress.

Any real pro-life victory in our nation must be a comprehensive one, not a piecemeal one. And the biggest obstacle we have to the pro-life cause is not in the courts but in the streets. Thus, this proposal of changing the size of the Supreme Court is really inadequate and lacks vision.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oct 29

To Joe Carter and his blogpost on how free trade reduces poverty. This appeared in the Acton blog.

It is tiring to keep pointing out that those who support free trade do so by filtering the evidence and the points they make. This is what our "free trade" has brought. The offshoring of jobs where trade is conducted without concern for labor conditions elsewhere and thus it supports the exploitation of workers  and others in other nations (see http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/05/business/worldbusiness/05sweatshop.html) for the sake of business profits. BtW, we should note that rescuing people from abject poverty does not imply that one is rescued from poverty.

We should note that what free trade does is to remove government controls on trade. When a government is a working democracy, then what free trade accomplishes is to remove democratic controls on trade. Finally we should note that many nations have built their own industries using protectionists measures. We might ask here whether free trade prevents nations from building their own industries and thus ensures a caste system for nations that embrace free trade.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oct 30

To Joe Carter and his blogpost about why some do not trust authority. This appeared in the Acton blog.

It seems to me that the fear of authority is not highly tied to the personal feeling of being judged, but it is caused by the abuse of power those with authority sometimes execute. This is especially true when it comes to the police. From the news stories I've seen, some groups of people are reluctant to call the police in an emergency because doing so before has led to the deaths of innocent people. For others, the police have meant the arrest of innocent friends and family members while for others it has led to racial profiling.

What is surprising is that race plays a role in many areas regarding how authority is perceived, but there is no mention of race as being a possible contributing factor for how authority is received.

In the meantime, perhaps the purpose of this article can best be described by the following quote from the report The Crisis Of Democracy:

In the past, those institutions which have played the major role in the indoctrination of the young in their rights and obligations as members of society have been the family, the church, the school, and the army.





---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This comment is currently awaiting moderation. This blogpost will be updated once the results of that moderation are known to this blog.

Update--though being listed as being posted Oct 31, the comment below was not posted until sometime later after November 2.

Oct 31

To Trevin Wax and his blogpost about 3 truths we need to remember when voting. This appeared in the Gospel Coalition website.

If only the 3 truths mentioned above were more evident in practice than just in theory. What we have seen, at least through my lifetime and I was born when Eisenhower was President, is that the Church, at least the conservative American Church, is yes political, but is not one that speaks truth to power nor is it on the front lines helping the vulnerable. Rather, the following description from the report The Crisis Of Democracy best describes the conservative American Church that both I have grown up in and still live.

In most of the Trilateral countries in the past decade there has been a decline in the confidence and trust which the people have in government, in their leaders, and, less clearly but most importantly, in each other. Authority has been challenged not only in government, but in trade unions, business enterprises, schools and universities, professional associations, churches, and civic groups. In the past, those institutions which have played the major role in the indoctrination of the young in their rights and obligations as members of society have been the family, the church, the school, and the army. The effectiveness of all these institutions as a means of socialization has declined severely.


Please note that these comments were made after what the report called the 'excess of democracy' from the 1960s. And we should note the some of the civilizing effects of that excess of democracy included the beginning of racial justice, equality, and reconciliation as well as examination of US foreign policies and wars.

Where was the conservative Church during Martin Luther King's protests against racism, economic exploitation, and the Vietnam War? In fact, where was it during the 1970s? We know where it was during the 1980s; it was supporting Ronald Reagan whose administration supported contra terrorists in Nicaragua and the military and paramilitaries of El Salvador where a war against priest advocating liberation theology was being conducted.  In addition, the fruit of Reagan's anti-union/pro-business stand can be seen in the still ever increasing wealth disparity we see in America today.

And where has the conservative Church been regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or the sanction years on Iraq hundreds of thousands of children died or Bush's invasion of Iraq? Where is the conservative Church standing regarding police accountability and Black Lives Matter? Where is the conservative American Church standing regarding environmental issues and is it defending the Standing Rock Sioux in their protest against the DAPL? Has the conservative American Church said anything about neoliberal capitalism or is it blindly supporting free markets and free trade without considering how those approaches affect all of Capitalism's stakeholders?

And where has the conservative American Church stood in protecting the equality of those from the LGBT community?

The three truths mentioned above, from what I've seen, are more present in theory than in practice.

BTW, there should be at least one point of correction. At Occupy Wall Street, we practiced a form of anarchism to a certain degree. But that does not even suggest that we had no order. The idea behind anarchism is not that there is no order, the idea is that because all are counted as leaders, there is no single leader or group of leaders. In other words, with anarchism, leadership and power are distributed as widely as possible rather than consolidating it as is practiced in other systems. This is not to say that anarchism is always the best form of self-governing. It is to say that we should represent it accurately. What I saw in Occupy's implementation of anarchism were rules and order that everyone could consent to.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Rosaria Butterfield and her blogpost response to Jen Hatmaker about how homosexual relationships are unbiblical and thus sin in contras to Hatmaker's view. This appeared in the Gospel Coalition website.

If I understand the article correctly, in terms of sexual ethics, we must promote and even push for laws that enforce Biblical sexual ethics for nonChristians in society. However, we don't do that for unbliblical heterosexual marriages. And we don't legally prohibit nonChristians from worshiping idols and false gods? So why should we support and even push for laws that prohibit same-sex marriages?

Could it be that our intolerance for same-sex marriage (SSM) in society is just one way by which we are failing to love those in the LGBT community? After all, supporting SSM doesn't prohibit one from seeing it as sin, nor does it prohibit one from sharing what the Bible says about SSM. But legally prohibiting SSM does not recognize the equality of those from the LGBT community with us in society. What is it that Paul says in I Corinthians 5:12-13?

We need to see the differences that exist between being a person in good standing in society from being a person in good standing in the Church. When we confuse those two standards, we make society a supplemental disciplinary arm of the Church just as Martin Luther tried to do when he wanted German society and princes to punish the Jews for their unbelief. How is it that we can love our LGBT neighbor while wanting society to punish and marginalize them for their sexual orientation and identity? Yes, sex outside of a monogamous heterosexual relationship is sin. But does that imply that society must punish that behavior? If so, what other unbiblical behaviors must society punish? Should we eliminate freedom of religion from The Constitution?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To R. Scott Clark and his blogpost quote of Rosaria Butterfield who called Jen Hatmaker’s words justifying homosexuality a ‘well-meant millstone’. This appeared in Heidelblog.

Is there more than one well-meant millstone here? For example, were laws that prohibited SSM and the current lack of legal protection for those in the LGBT community at work which exists in the majority of our states millstones to people like Jen so that the only choice they see is to either justify what is clearly sin or to continue marginalizing those in the LGBT community?

Another Road Paved With Good Intentions

John Piper is very sincere when frantically writing against homosexuality. The concern expressed in his blog's article on sodomy was that people will fall into the hands of Satan if they believe Satan's lies which Piper has identified and listed in his article (click here to see the article). And what both the Christian and nonChristian as well as the heterosexual and homosexual must distinguish is what Scriptures actually say from Piper's trying too hard to warn people.

First, we need to note that engaging in homosexual acts is a serious sin according to the Scriptures. We see that in both Romans 1:24-27 and I Corinthians 6:9-11. One cannot practice sound exegesis and come to some other conclusion. Those who disagree often look for the tiniest detail to justify the biggest straying from the intent of the Scriptures. 

Having said that, what we have to note that it is still possible to try too hard to prosecute a particular sin like homosexuality. And that has recently happened quite often as conservative Christians have searched high and low to convince the general public to oppose same-sex marriage. 

One sign that Piper tried too hard to make his case is in the associations he makes. Note the first paragraph of his article. The same Satan who has inspired people to deal in drugs and extreme violence misleads people to engage in homosexual acts. Scripturally speaking, that is true. But it is also true that the same demonic being who has lead many down the dark paths of drugs and violence has also led people to commit  petty sins as well--it isn't until later that Piper will compare the significance of homosexual sins with theft. So why is Piper trying to associate homosexuality with drugs and violence in that way? He is trying too hard to make his case.

But we could also see how Piper wants homosexuals to be treated by society. He wants society to associate shame with homosexual practices and thus stigmatize homosexuals. To be fair, he wants society to stigmatize other sins as well such as kidnapping, adultery, stealing and fornication. In other words, he wants society to act as a supplemental disciplinary arm of the Church. He wants society to start punishing sinners where the Church leaves off. And here is another example of Piper trying too hard for he is expecting too much from society. In addition, he wants it to punish both personal sins and sins that are criminal acts as well. For society to do that, it would have to be dominated by Christian moral values. But if it was, where would be the religious freedom of those who are not Christians. Where would be the freedom of those whose values allow for sex outside of a monogamous, heterosexual marriage? And finally, how could Piper biblically expect that from society if the Apostle Paul didn't (see I Corinthians 5:12-13)?

Yes, Piper has legitimate concerns regarding  the spiritual dangers of homosexual practices. But perhaps Piper is too old school, that is he comes from a time when Christianity did dominate parts of society, to recognize the dangers of his try too hard approach.

Society, according to the old school approach, is not a place where homosexuals and Christians with a Biblical view of sex can live as equals. In fact, it is not a place where people who could not be church members in good standing because of their behaviors and Christians exist as equals. And this is where Piper's approach to challenging homosexual practices shows that he is trying to hard. In addition, Piper's appreoach causes unnecessary blowback. For it seems that in a society that is built on religious freedom, we should be able to have a  reasoned discussion about sexual morals in society. But that cannot occur when we call on all outside of the discussion to punish our opponent by marginalizing them. Furthermore, such will not fly in a society where there is more diversity and where the significant personal and public contributions of those from the LGBT community to both us individuals and our society are too great to ignore. And it cannot happen when the rest in society see some conservative Christians sorely persecute others because of certain personal sins while remaining silent about or supportive of our nation's wars and its economic system that relies on human and environmental exploitation to survive, 

In contrast to Piper's old school approach against treating homosexuals as equals comes two verses from Paul's Epistle to the Romans. In Romans 2:1ff, Paul warns us against judging others just a few verses after condemning homosexuality in the previous chapter. Why does he warn us against judging others? He does so because when we look down on others for their sin, we condemn ourselves because we commit sins and sometimes they are the same sins we are condemning others for.

In addition, we have Romans 3:9 that tells us that neither the gentiles with the sins listed in Romans 1 that include homosexuality nor the religious people of his time who also sin are superior to the other. Why? Because we all sin. 

Piper's old school approach simply tries too hard. And because of its attempted overreach, which has been going on for decades, those who believe in fairness will be pressured by Piper's approach to reject his claim that homosexual acts are sinful regardless of what the Scriptures say. In addition, because of  Piper and others practice and promote an old school approach to public morality, there will eventually be a pendulum swing that goes the other way. And the energy used to push the pendulum in the direction preferred by old school approach to society and morality will be the same energy with which the pendulum is returning. And while many of us conservative Christians will cry foul at the changing of the pendulum's direction, we really have no right to complain considering how we have insisted that those with a different sexual orientation than our own be sorely punished publicly.

ONIM For July 20, 2015

Christian News

•  Majority Of US Evangelicals Back Israel -- Christian Today
• Ravi Zacharias -- We've Reached 'Breaking Point' On Divide Over Sexuality -- Christian Today
• Greek Evangelicals Divided As Country Continues To Struggle -- Christian Today
• Faith Takes Center Stage At Family Leadership Summit As Rubio Reads From The Bible -- The Christian Post
• Russell Moore's ERLC  Posts A Flawed 'Evangelical Declaration On Marriage' -- The Christian Post
• Pastor Bill Owens Urges Christians To Stand Against Gay Marriage By Refusing To Obey 'Unjust Laws' -- The Christian Post
• "I Was A Wild Man": How To Decode Evangelical Testimony -- Religion Dispatches
• Do We Owe Human Rights To The Christian Right? -- Religion Dispatches
• Data-Mining The Denominations: The Southern Baptists In Four Charts -- Religion Dispatches
• I will Never Repent For Being A Homosexual -- Huffington Post

World News

• How Goldman Sachs Profited From Greek Debt Crisis -- The Nation
• Disinventing Democracy -- ZNet
• The California County That's Made A Bold Move To Cut The Big Banks Out Of Its Economy -- Alternet
• Obama Greeted With Confederate Flags In Oklahoma -- CBS News
• Senate Recommends $1.7 Billion In Education Cuts -- Think Progress
• Obama To Be First Sitting President To Visit Federal Prison -- Restoring Liberty
• Bernie Sanders Stance On Israel Is More Of The Same Ole, Same Ole -- Mintpress
• Mass Shooting In Tennessee Leave Four Dead -- Huffington Post
• Four Marines Dead: Semi-Automatic Weapons Are A Security Problem For The U.S. -- Truthdig
• It's Not Terrorism If It's Retaliation: Chattanooga Shooting, If Linked To ISIS, Is A Legitimate Act Of War -- OpEd News
• James Holmes Verdict Reached: Theater Shooter Found Guilty -- Huffington Post
• Are Bernie Sanders And Elizabeth Warren Fooling Us All? -- Truthdig
• The End Of Capitalism Has Begun -- The Guardian
• Police: 2 Dead, 3 Wounded In Shootings In Northern Maine -- Yahoo News
• Ukraine Outrages Moscow By Deporting Top Russian Envoy -- Yahoo News
• Was The Civil War A Fiscal Conflict?-- The Imaginative Conservative
• U.S. Offers To Help Israel Bolster Defenses, Yet Iran Nuclear Deal Leaves Ally Uneasy -- New York Times
• Retired General: Drones Create More Terrorists Than They Kill, Iraq War Helped Create ISIS -- The Intercept
• 2012 Report Warned About Rise Of ISIS -- The Sunday Times
• Hecklers Demand Hillary Clinton Buck Fossil Fuel Cash And 'Act On Climate' -- Common Dreams
• Nexen Pipeline Ruptures, Causing Huge Spill Near Fort McMurray -- Edmonton Journal
• Video: Texas Finds 'No Wrongdoing' In Burial Of Hundreds Of Immigrants In Unmarked Mass Graves -- Truthdig
• Syria Airstrikes By UK Pilots Break Cameron's Promise Of Vote On Military Intervention, Claims Tory MP -- Huffington Post
• Will Confederate Flag Backlash Strike Mississippi Next -- BBC
• Operation Samson: Israel's Deployment Of Nuclear Missils On Subs From Germany -- Spiegel International
• Germans Protest In 14 Cities Against Merkel's Stance On Greece -- Popular Resistance
• Angela Merkel Makes 14-Year-Old Palestinian Girl Cry By Telling Her She Is Not Welcome In Germany -- Mondoweiss

Pick(s) Of The Litter

• Climate Change Seen As Top Global Threat -- Pew Research Center
• Black Child Poverty Holds Steady Even As Other Groups See Decline -- Pew Research Center
• The Path To A Final Iran Nuclear Deal: Long Days And Short Tempers -- The Washington Post
• Chris Hedges On Bernie Sanders And The Corporate Democrats -- Counterpunch
• Corporate Capitalism Is The Foundation Of Police Brutality And The Prison State -- Truthdig
• Karl Marx Was Right -- Truthdig
• Secession, The Confederate Flag, And Slavery -- Constitution Daily
• Leaked Document: Nearly One-Third Of 847,000 Vets With Pending Applications For VA Health Care Have Already Died -- Huffington Post

ONIM For March 16, 2015

Christian News

• Pakistan: 10 Dead In Church Blasts -- Christian Today (UK)
• Vatican Supports Military Action Against ISIS -- Christian Today (UK)
• The Christians Who Are Defying ISIS -- Christian Today (UK)
• Do-It-Yourself Church Unity -- Christianity Today
• Bible Influences Only 1 In 10 Evangelicals On Immigration Reform -- Christianity Today
• A Doctor's View On Hormonal Contraception -- Christianity Today
• SanFrancisco's Largest Evangelical Megachurch To Allow Non-Celibate Homosexuals To Be Members -- The Christian Post
• A Safe Place For Sinners: How The Church Responds To Failure -- The Christian Post
• Mr. Rogers Was A Counter-Culture Christian Icon -- The Christian Post
• Introducing Alert Silk System To Warn Businesses Of The Gay Threat To Their Religious Liberties -- Huffington Post
• The End Of White Christian America Is Nigh: Why The Country's Youths Are Abandoning Religious Conservatism -- Salon

World News

• Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker Compares Protesters To ISIS -- The Daily Kos
• First-Ever Adjunct Walkout Raises Awareness Of Crisis In Higher Ed -- Waging NonViolence
• LAPD Killing Lays Bare Enduring Horror Of Skid Row -- Yahoo News
• Alabama High Court Orders Halt To Same-Sex Marriage Licenses -- Reuters
• U.S.-Venezuela Row Deepens Over Embassy Staffing -- Reuters
• China Defense Budget Rise To Defy Slowing Economy -- Reuters
• Rise Of Pragmatic Arab Politician Shakes Up Israeli Politics -- Yahoo News
• Newly Wed From Iraq Fatally Shot While Taking Pics After Seeing Snow For The First Time -- NBCDFW.Com 
• American Flag, Others Banned In UC Irvine Student Area -- LA Times
• Tens Of Thousands In Tel Aviv Demand Netanyahu's Ouster -- 972 Mag
• Tom Udall's Unlikely Alliance With The Chemical Industry -- New York Times
• Looking For Leaders On Climate? Follow The Women Farmers -- Common Dreams
• Saudi Arabia Becomes World's Biggest Arms Importer -- The Guardian
• Saudis Block Swedish Minister's Speech At Arab League -- Reuters
• Republicans Warn Iran Nuclear Deal With Obama May Not Last -- Reuters
• Chapel Hill And The Racialization Of Murder -- ZCommentaries
• The Flood Wall Street 10 Fought The Law And Won -- Waging Nonviolence
• Georgia Trash Man Gets 30 Days In Jail For 5 A.M. Pickup -- Yahoo News
• 'Epic Fail': Feminism And Ecological Crises -- Resilience
• 'Icebergs' Wash Ashore On Cape Cod -- Yahoo News
• Video Of Racist Chant Threatens University Of Oklahoma's Progress -- Yahoo News
• Israel Demolishes EU-Funded Shelters In Jerusalem -- Yahoo News
• Lindsay Graham: As President I Would Deploy The Military Against Congress -- Vox
• Police, Other Groups Try To Tamp Down Tensions In Ferguson -- Yahoo News
• Arab Village Of Damash Fears Being Wiped Off Israel's Map -- Middle East Eye
• The Zionist Union's Plan For A Palestinian Bantustan -- Middle East Monitor
• Gaza Farmers Export First Produce To Israel After 8 Years -- Yahoo News
• Wind Power On The Rise, Could Supply One-Third Of Nation's Electricity By 2050, Says DOE -- Common Dreams
• Why Everyone Seems To Have Cancer -- New York Times

Pick(s) Of The Litter

• US Report Finds Racial Bias In Ferguson Police -- Yahoo News
• Fatal Shooting Of Unarmed 19-Year-Old Prompts Protest -- Yahoo News
• Colin Powell Still Sees 'Dark Vein' Of Intolerance in GOP -- Yahoo News
• Ex-Mobil VP: Fracking Companies Push People Out Of Homes -- RT
• The Whoredom Of The Left -- Truthdig
• How A Small Quaker Group Forced PNC Bank To Stop Financing Mountaintop Removal -- Waging Nonviolence
• Witnesses: Ferguson Gunshots Came From Hilltop Across Street From Protests -- Talking Points Memo
• NASA: California Has One Year Of Water Left -- Newsweek

References

1.