Posts Tagged ‘ God ’

christianity and homosexuality: part 2 – did the state of nc get it all wrong?

Same-sex marriage has been all the rave the past week. In the span of just a few days, both our President and Vice President expressed unprecedented support for same-sex marriage, all the while the state of NC passed new legislation to ensure that same-sex marriage will not be legalized now or at any point in the future within its borders.

What is interesting to me is how Christians have responded to the NC ruling – some have applauded the decision while others have excoriated the state of NC, and in particular the Christians of NC, for it. With this in mind, there are a few questions that I feel need to be considered here:

  1. Why are homosexuals so concerned about the legalization of same-sex marriage?
  2. Why are (many) Christians so opposed to the legalization of same-sex marriage?
  3. Is it inherently un-Christian to be for or against same-sex marriage?
  4. Is this a fight for Christians that is worth getting into anyway?

So let’s start from the top: what is the big deal to homosexuals about being able to marry each other? We have a few options: 1) they can’t truly love each other without being married, 2) they desperately need the tax breaks and other government incentives they are not afforded through “civil unions,” or 3) being “married” would bring the legitimization and acceptance the homosexual community greatly craves.

Now, I have no hard data to back this up, but everything I’ve read on the subject points to one thing – same-sex marriage is about acceptance. It’s not about love – the status of being “married” has no true impact on a relationship (unless, of course, one believes in virginity prior to marriage, which is typically a stance restricted to the heterosexual evangelical Christian community). It’s not as though once the officiator declares you husband and wife (or husband and husband or what have you) that suddenly the doors of love are opened to you. Nor do I believe that this battle is about government incentives, especially considering the homosexuality community tends to fall within a very wealthy demographic. No, this is about being on the same plane as heterosexual relationships. Until homosexuals can do everything that heterosexuals can, they aren’t truly co-equals. They are a lesser type of relationship. An “also ran” romantic union. Second fiddle. Whatever you want to call it. They’ve worked very hard to gain acceptance into American society, and this is quite possibly the biggest hurdle for them to overcome before finding themselves totally integrated within our culture.

So why do Christians tend to oppose same-sex marriage? Why do we see Billy Graham running ads for the people of NC to vote against it? Why do we hear preachers forming nasty diatribes against those who support it? Why is there so much animosity and anger and fear among evangelicals whenever they mention the idea of homosexuals getting married?

I think that the societal shift in thinking on homosexuality has led evangelical leaders to realize how much they’ve failed. Their messages have fallen on deaf ears. Their programs haven’t brought about any substantive societal change. If the Bible teaches against homosexuality but people are growing more and more in favor of homosexuality, then that proves that people care less and less about the Bible, right? And if they care less about the Bible, the Bible teachers, leaders, and pastors have failed to get through to their students.

Ultimately, this is why I believe that same-sex marriage has become such a hot button within evangelical Christianity. It’s not that Christians hate homosexuals and have singled them out in order to make them miserable. It’s that they see the next generation jumping ship from historic Christianity. The fact that American tolerance towards homosexuality has skyrocketed the past 2 decades indicates one or more of three things, each of which point to failure among church leaders:

  1. America is less Christian now than it was a few decades ago.
  2. American Christians interpret the Bible differently now than they did a few decades ago.
  3. The Christians who spoke out against homosexuality for all these years were wrong.

These are all serious issues, and I think that there is a little bit of all three at work here, but I want to focus on #2, since that is a bit more obscure than the others. (I will indirectly address #3 at the end of this post.) One development that was practically unheard of before the 90s is the concept of the “evangelical homosexual” – someone who is homosexual but holds to the basic tenets of evangelical Christianity.

The EH (evangelical homosexual) believes that the OT teachings against homosexuality were part of the OT Law and not meant to be normative for all people of all times, especially considering the NT’s teaching that we are no longer under the law. Furthermore, Jesus never condemned homosexuality, confirming that He did not have any problem with it. So homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable means of finding romantic fulfillment for Christians.

Did you catch what was left out of the previous paragraph? Yes, the letters of Paul. Paul’s statements in Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 6 appear pretty damning against homosexuals. So how can an EH get around this? Either throw Paul’s letters out altogether (why do we need Paul when we have Jesus?) or accept Paul’s writings as biblical but not without flaw (Paul didn’t truly understand homosexuality when he wrote those letters). Do you see the problem here? If Paul’s writings are thrown out, then some of the most crucial doctrinal books of the NT will also be cast aside, and if his writings are biblical but flawed, then any other biblical writings could also be flawed and the entire Bible is open to question.

You see now why homosexuality has become an evangelical hot button? It’s because the homosexuality debate has revealed a shift in social ideologies and biblical interpretation – both in a direction antithetical to historic Christian faith. So because it’s clear that society has stopped listening to the evangelical leaders, the evangelicals have gotten louder. They’ve upped the ante. They’ve become more passionate. And I dare say that they’ve sounded at times downright hateful towards homosexuals.

Now, I’m not going to pretend like the trend away from historic Christianity is the only reason why Christians get so upset by same-sex marriage. I’m painting with broad strokes here to get at the nub of the issue. Certainly there are some Christians who are simply bigoted against homosexuals. Others see such a close connection between their faith and the Republican party that the same-sex battle has become a “holy war” of sorts. And others still are simply frustrated with having a leftist agenda seemingly shoved down their throats by the media and government. Similarly, not every homosexual is merely concerned about acceptance in the same-sex marriage debate. Surely there are other concerns that certain people latch onto as the main reasons why they care about same-sex marriage. But again, I am intentionally painting with broad strokes here since I can’t possibly include every aspect of these two groups’ agendas.

So, taking a step back, how does this impact the Christian? Is there a moral aspect to this debate? In other words, is there a side of fence that every Christian should be on for supporting or opposing same-sex marriage?

Let’s evaluate what appears to me to be most common argument that Christians should support same-sex marriage – the Law of Love. This argument follows the logic that if Christians oppose same-sex marriage, they are, in essence, trying to prevent two people from loving each other. Since the foundation of Christianity is love for God and others, opposing same-sex marriage opposes the very essence of Christianity.

Does this argument hold up logically or biblically? I would argue that it does not. To oppose a certain type of marriage is not to oppose love – in fact, I love many people that I am not married to or romantically involved with. The biblical concept of love is first non-romantic – something that we are commanded to have toward all people. Just because two people cannot marry each other doesn’t mean that they cannot love each other. Nowhere in the Bible does God restrict Christian love in this way, and I’ve already suggested above that I do not believe that love is the main issue for homosexuals in this debate anyway. They will love each other in the way that they choose regardless of whether or not the state considers them “married.”

As such, I do not believe that Christians opposing same-sex marriage are inherently unloving, although I concede that many are unloving in the manner with which they oppose it. But that is an important distinction to make. Some people genuinely look at Scripture and come away from it believing that same-sex marriage does not serve the purposes that God created marriage for, namely for reproduction (Gen 1:26-28) and to give a living illustration of Christ’s love for His church (Eph 5:22-33). If same-sex marriage doesn’t serve these purposes, then is it really glorifying to God? And if it isn’t glorifying to God, then why should Christians be expected to support it?

This leads me to the other half of the equation – is it wrong for Christians to support same-sex marriage? I would encourage caution from jumping to conclusions here. As I’ve already mentioned, the historical-grammatical literary approach to interpreting Scripture that is typically used within evangelical circles will lead to only one conclusion on homosexuality – that the Bible teaches that it is a sin and that those who willingly practice it do so in open rebellion against God. For this reason most Christians have difficulty supporting homosexuality in good conscience.

But that’s homosexuality.  Our discussion here is about same-sex marriage, which is a specific aspect of the larger issue of homosexuality. The two are not exactly the same, and I would argue that, ultimately, same-sex marriage isn’t the real problem for evangelicals. After all, the Bible never lists same-sex marriage as a sin. No, as I’ve already alluded to, the problem here isn’t same-sex marriage; it’s homosexuality. But considering that homosexuality is already legal in our country, does it ultimately  matter if homosexuals are able to “get married?” Will preventing that marriage actually fix anything? Would it actually lessen the amount of sexual sin in our society? I can’t see any instance where it would.

So I actually wouldn’t judge a Christian who supports same-sex marriage on the basis that sinners who aren’t hurting others should be allowed to sin. Christians can’t seriously expect the government to stop people from committing all sins. Imagine if the government tried to regulate coveting or pride – it would be a total disaster! If my state tried to pass legislation that made covetousness illegal, I would vote against it in a heartbeat. That’s not their job to regulate; it’s God’s. And maybe we should think the same way with homosexuality and same-sex marriage.

And this leads me to my final question: is this a cause worth fighting for? Should Christians lobby against same-sex marriage, send out ads for fellow-Christians to pass heterosexual marriage legislation, and swarm the voting booths on the day that such legislation goes up for vote?

If so, then what are we trying to accomplish? What is the end goal here? Are we trying to create a “Christian society?” Are we trying to change hearts by changing laws? Are we trying to make our country more favorable to historic Christianity?

Whatever the end goal is, we don’t accomplish it with legislation. We accomplish it with prayer. We accomplish it with love. We accomplish it by telling others about a Savior who died on their behalf so that they could live and reign with Him. We accomplish everything that we are seeking to accomplish when we let God accomplish it through the gospel. These are not things that we can ultimately do in the legislature. These are things that only God can do in the hearts of people and in and through the Church.

The risk for Christians in singeling out same-sex marriage for attack is, as Rachel Held Evans suggests, to bring Christianity into disrepute over something that is nothing more than a cultural battle. If the world views our efforts as anti-homosexual bigotry, then they will never be remotely interested in the God that we worship. That’s a huge gamble to take – to make a political/cultural issue a primary platform at the risk of it being a nationwide stumblingblock to the gospel.

Although I strongly support states’ rights and feel like the state of NC did the best thing for their people (after all, 61% of them voted in favor of outlawing same-sex marriage – it wouldn’t make sense to vote against something the vast majority of the population is in favor of), I do not feel like Christians do well to keep lining up for battle over same-sex marriage. There is something much more at stake than just losing the battle over homosexuality. We risk the Cross being lost in the battle.

Photo Attribution:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sigurdas/ / http://www.flickr.com/photos/sigurdas/2308470211/

2011 in review – 10 things i learned

No doubt this post is late. Most people wrote their “2011 review” columns in December. But I guess it just didn’t occur to me until recently that it would be beneficial to me (and maybe others) if I spelled out what a year’s worth of God pursuing me accomplished.

In 2011 I saw a seismic shift in my theological presuppositions. I was raised a fundamentalist, and I saw enough good in fundamentalism that I wanted to remain in those types of churches. That was until I realized that my disagreements with fundamentalism were not just minor ones (as I had always convinced myself) – they were major enough that they were keeping me from growing the way I should. So, for the first time in my life, 2011 saw me in a non-fundamentalist church, and there were many things that I found myself thinking and doing that I had never thought or done before because of my upbringing – and yet many of these things seemed so simple and obvious.

So I say this to warn you that some of what I “learned” will likely be radical to you if you fancy yourself a fundamentalist. For many others, these things will appear incredibly basic, even elementary. With that in mind, let’s begin.

1. Gospel-centeredness. Although I didn’t realize it at the time, one of the main things that drove me out of fundamentalist churches was their teaching of the gospel. To the majority of them, the gospel is something for the unbeliever, and growth through good works is for the believer. I had a significant problem with this works-based model of sanctification (Paul calls it “another gospel” in Galatians), and so I fled to the gospel and found that my growth in Christ is not based on something I must do, but what He has already done.

I had striven my whole life to put on the fruit of the Spirit in my own power – with zero success. I realized that the fruit of the Spirit is something that comes naturally when one looks to the Cross. We love because He first loved us. We have joy because Christ has secured our eternal home for us in heaven. We have peace because God’s wrath has been satisfied by Christ’s death. Think about what an insult it is to our Savior when we feel like we need to conjure up the fruit of the Spirit in our lives. Was His death not enough? Is the knowledge of Him and what He accomplished not sufficient for life and godliness? These truths gripped me more than ever this past year, and the result was dramatic.

2. Continuationist but not entirely “charismatic.” My church is continuationist is doctrine and it’s very refreshing to be around Spirit-led people who are pursuing the gifts of the Spirit. This is, in my experience, absent in most churches that teach cessationist pneumatology. As a result, I’ve found myself agreeing with the vast majority of continuationist doctrine.

However, I still don’t know what to think about speaking in tongues and healing. I definitely do not see anywhere in the Bible that clearly teaches that these have ceased, but on the other hand, I do not see them being performed in the same ways that they were in the Early Church. (When was the last time you saw someone healed of a sickness by going under the shadow of someone with the gift of healing?) So the jury is still out for me on how to view these “charismatic gifts.”

3. Biblical fellowship. I never truly understood the importance of Christian fellowship until this year. In many churches I had been involved with, fellowship is having a pot luck meal with the rest of the church. The result was that spiritual growth was strictly a one-on-one thing. In other words, it’s between “you and God” and no one else should be involved with it. If that were the case, then why did Christ institute the Church? Why does the Bible command us to confess our faults to each other? Why does Paul tell us to encourage one other? How are we to bear each other’s burdens? These are things that cannot be accomplished merely in pot luck dinners and church visitation. These are things that should be done throughout the week – encouraging, warning, helping, loving. Spiritual growth does have a “one-on-one” element, but it also has an “us together” element. And I found this past year that I need the latter just as much as I need the former in order to grow.

4. Enjoyable (biblical) worship. Fundamentalism teaches that you should enjoy worship but not too much. You must develop a taste for classical music and 18-19th Century hymns, otherwise you won’t be able to worship properly. For much of my life, I attempted to do this, and I had some success with it. But it always felt shallow. It seemed strange that, even though Scripture never addresses the subject of specific musical styles, this was such an important aspect of worship. Why was it that the music that I was best able to express myself through was so sinful? Why was it that the worship that I most enjoyed allegedly resulted in me “walking in the flesh?”

In reality, I had tossed out that bad doctrine a few years ago, but it wasn’t until this past year that I actually began visiting churches that had a biblical view of worship. It was remarkable what a difference it made when I was able to enjoy worship for the first time. It was no longer just a part of the Sunday service but a crucial time of offering my praise back to God.

Now, worship is one of the highlights of my week. In fact, when my wife and I went on vacation last year, we actually went out of our way to find a good church to attend on the Sunday we were out, drove over an hour to visit it, and loved every moment of it. In past vacations, attending a church service would have been absurd. This time, it felt like our week would’ve been incomplete without worship.

5. Loving parenting. Being a parent is hard. Being a loving one is even harder. Many times this past year I found myself responding to my daughter in the flesh. It’s the easy thing to do. When something goes wrong, get angry, yell, and put the child in her place. But this model of parenting isn’t what we find in the gospel. God is our loving Father who graciously shows mercy and love to us in our rebellion. This is still something I have to constantly grow in, but what I learned in 2011 was an important first step.

6. Bible reading/study programs. There are many Bible reading programs out there, but all of them involve one thing – time. The Bible is no small piece of literature – a compilation of 66 books which each have their own unique message but which also depend on each other to comprise the larger message of the gospel.

This creates a challenge because each book contains so much depth that it is virtually impossible to understand one book without camping out in it and studying it for days, weeks, or even months. But at the same time, you cannot understand that book without understanding the other 65 books. So you must choose your poison – either study one book at length to the detriment of the others or read through all of them relatively quickly to both the advantage and detriment of each of them.

However, in 2011 I found what I believe to be the best possible compromise – a read-through-the-Bible-in-90-days plan that exposes a person to the entirety of Scripture but still leaves 9 months to study several books in depth. It’s certainly a challenge to stay on a plan like that, but it is much more beneficial than a “camp out on one book” plan that ignores the rest of Scripture or a “read the Bible in one year plan” which has just enough daily reading to make it difficult to study in depth but not enough to give you a big picture overview of the book.

Many people object that 90 days forces you to read through the Bible too quickly to digest what you’re reading. I 100% disagree. I feel like that is the perfect amount of time for catching on to some of the major themes and ideas that the authors were trying to communicate. Many, if not all the books of the Bible were written under the assumption that the audience would read through them quickly. As such, there are many things that you pick up on reading through a book in 1, 2, or 3 days that you would not pick up on in 10 days. If there is something you don’t understand that you would like to camp out on, you can make a note of it and come back to it after the 90 days is up. You still have 9 more months for in depth study!

7. Bible audio. One thing I did more of this past year than ever before was to listen to audio of the Bible. I always shied away from it because I liked to have the option of taking time to stop and think about a verse or passage that struck me, and I didn’t think listening to an audio recording would allow that.

However, what I learned from this experience is that much of the Bible makes for great listening. The majority of the Bible was written as a narrative/story and the authors probably intended that their stories would be read aloud. I found that there were many things that I never picked up on when reading a passage that I did pick up on when listening to it. There were several, “Ohhh, that’s why that happened!” moments that occurred as I listened to the books.

And really, the same thing is true of some of the “meatier,” deeper books – most notably, the epistles. Many, of them were written with the intention that they would be read allowed to a local church body. (If you look closely, you will see references to this throughout the Bible, such as in Revelation where John commends those who both “read aloud” and “hear” the book.) So while there is good reason to read and study a passage in depth, parsing each noun and conjugating each verb, many passages were ultimately written with a listener-audience in mind.

8. More reformed. I’ve had a more reformed theology of salvation since high school, but only recently have I started questioning dispensational eschatology as well. Having always been taught dispensationalism, some of the nuances of reformed theology are a little foreign to me, but the more I learn it, the more I find myself embracing it. I do not currently consider myself amillennial, but maybe in the near future I will. There is still much studying that I must do on the subject before I fully come to my own conclusions.

9. Knowing less than before. In many ways I feel like I know less than I did last year. That’s not because I have forgotten a substantial amount during that time (although that may be true). It’s more of a mentality shift, and it’s built on the foundation that Christians (myself included) tend to be more dogmatic on many relatively inconsequential issues than Scripture is. The Bible says a lot, but it also doesn’t say a lot.

For instance, Genesis says that God created the world and poetically depicts Yahweh as speaking creation into existence in 6 days. Did Moses intend for his audience to interpret that literally or is there a more figurative significance? (Maybe the “speaking” the world into existence signifies the ease with which God created everything, or maybe the “6 days” was intended to be more of an allusion to the work week (and subsequent Sabbath Day of rest) than it was an actual time stamp on God’s creative labors.) I tend to learn towards the more literal understanding of Genesis 1-2, but the reality is that Moses explains the entire creation of the cosmos in 2 short chapters, and he clearly does not intend for his readers to analyze these chapters scientifically (yikes). Shouldn’t that lead us to be a little less dogmatic on how it all happened, considering that there are clearly an abundance of details left out from this creation narrative? The answer is: yes. And I don’t feel like that’s a heretical response, as long as you believe in the one part of the narrative that is clear – that God created the world on His own the way He wanted to. Ultimately, that’s what all the debate over Genesis 1-2 is about anyway.

So whereas in the past I would staunchly challenge those who disagreed with my interpretations of passages, such as Genesis 1-2, now I find myself becoming less certain that I am right and those who disagree with me are wrong. The reality is that no one is right 100% of the time – not even theologians. I think it’s better to recognize that up front instead of having to learn it the hard way.

10. Conservatism vs. Christ-likeness. Maybe the most drastic change in my thinking occurred when it finally sunk in that I could be extremely conservative and yet know nothing of Christ. The Pharisees were probably the most conservative people of their day, and yet their conservatism became sin because they elevated it above the clear teachings of Scripture.

As I began to meditate on this, it became clear that many times the most conservative choice is not the most biblical one. Was Christ conservative in the way He approached the Sabbath Day? Clearly not. Read the OT Sabbath laws and then read what Christ did on the Sabbath. Many of the things He did appear to be blatant violations of Scripture, but that was ok because He recognized the big picture and understood that slavishly conservative adherence to Sabbath law was not what God was looking for.

What is wrong in large doses might be right in smaller ones. What is wrong in some circumstances might be right in others. What is wrong to one person might be right to another one. Obedience to God isn’t a formula. You can’t just assume that it’s always best to be conservative, to play it safe. Christ didn’t play it safe. He didn’t just do the most conservative thing all the time. He did things that caused others to call him a drunkard, a glutton, a friend of prostitutes, and demon-possessed! And if Christ-likeness looks to some like gluttony, then I hope someday to be accused of being the most gluttonous person alive.

Christianity and Homosexuality Part 1: A Political Perspective

There is a sad reality that we face as Christians – our rallying point is no longer the gospel; it’s politics. What I mean is the most surefire way to have Christians from different denominations, races, agendas, subcultures, worship styles, and general theological presuppositions get together and be unified is to have them rally together over “family” (i.e., against homosexuality) or “life” (i.e., against abortion). Politics.

I’ve heard tons of examples of “great success” that churches have had coming together with other churches (with whom they could never find fellowship in the gospel) for a political rally. Such was the case with a former church I attended in Greenville, which bragged about how they had rallied several years ago with other Christians and churches, with whom they had serious theological disagreements, because they were able to set their gospel differences aside for the cause of politics. This type of thinking is simple – we can’t spread the gospel with these other believers because we have too many significant theological differences that would cause more disruption than unity. On the other hand, finding unity in politics is much more simple because you either believe in abortion or you don’t. There aren’t as many potential issues that two Christians could disagree on within the discussion on abortion as there are when it comes to the theologies of salvation and sanctification.

Now, I understand this argument. It makes sense. Using human logic, it is very reasonable – compelling, even. It’s just not biblical. Don’t believe me? Read John 17:20-23, where Christ prays that His followers would be unified in the same way that God the Father and the Son are unified. In other words, His prayer is that Christians will enjoy a unity that mirrors the most unified unity in all the cosmos – the trinity. Why does He pray this? “So that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me” (v. 23). Do you think that this unity Christ prayed for was supposed to be a unity in politics? Maybe at times, depending on the circumstances. At the exclusion of unity in the gospel? No way – Jesus said twice in these 4 verses that the goal of this unity is all about the world seeing God’s love that He displayed in sending Christ (the gospel)!

So how does this relate to homosexuality? Christians, in their zeal to reform our society’s morality, have painted a false picture of Christ to the rest of the world, particularly with regard to the issue of homosexuality. Because we will quickly unify for a rally over “the traditional family,” but can’t seem to find a way to rally for the gospel, the world perceives that we are more concerned with stamping out homosexuality than we are with celebrating and sharing God’s love. Maybe they’re right. But even if they’re not, it’s still pretty clear from John 17 that we’ve failed. We aren’t showing the love of God. We are showing our love of traditional, conservative politics.

Now let me caution you from concluding that I am against Christian involvement in politics. I, for one, actually enjoy politics, and I feel very strongly that Christians ought to make their voices heard in this arena. I am not against Christians participating in (or even sponsoring) political rallies. We live in a great democratic republic, which empowers the people to elect those who represent them. With that in mind, I would argue that it is the Christian’s responsibility to be involved in politics at some level.

The problem is not that Christians are involved in politics and shouldn’t be. The problem is that we worry about saving our country from liberal legislation more than we do about saving it from sin. For every teaspoon of politics there should be 10,000 gallons of gospel. But instead we make excuses that we can’t find enough common ground with other Christians on gospel issues. So we abandon the Great Commission out of some misguided sense of superior theology. Our world is lost and dying, and we sit around making excuses why we can’t come together to bring it hope! This isn’t a “commitment to the truth” or an “unwillingness to compromise” – these phrases are euphamisms that lazy, prideful Christians use to excuse their lack of commitment to fellowship in the gospel. More accurately we should call it a “commitment to disobedience” or an “unwillingness to follow the Great Commission.” Christ expects us to find a way to be unified under the gospel, and it’s not our place to come up with a myriad of excuses why we can’t.  Churches need to think more seriously about how they can have fellowship with other churches and Christians. Instead, many churches have chosen the easy route – unity on politics, dissension on the gospel.

To make matters worse, in their zeal for politics, many conservative Christians have zeroed in on the issue of homosexuality to the exclusion of many other important political issues that directly impact the church. (When was the last time you heard Christians discuss the ramifications of churches ministering to the poor as opposed to the government creating a welfare state that supports them? For me – never. Does anyone else feel like the apostle Paul would be horrified at this?) My guess as to why this has happened is that, because homosexuality has been a losing battleground for Christians, many churches and church leaders have felt compelled to up the amp and make their anti-homosexual arguments louder, more frequent, and more passionate. The end result is that we sound obsessed, angry, hateful, and hypocritical. In other words, Christians sound unChristian when it comes to discussing homosexuality.

But there is a bigger problem here, which I alluded to earlier – Christians will never be able to reform secular society through politics. Only the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit can do any true work of moral reformation. We can’t expect non-Christians to pass laws that are based in Scripture – this is ludicrous. If our society is going to be more Christ-like, then it must be made up of more Christians. It’s as simple as that.

So I’ve got sad news for all those Christians who have rallied against homosexuality and abortion over the years – for the most part, you wasted your time. Maybe you went to the rally for fellowship and found it. Maybe you went there to better understand the issues and learned something new. Maybe you went just to get caught up in the excitement and had a good time. But if you went there to bring about any meaningful change on our nation, you failed. Our nation is more pro-gay, pro-abortion, anti-Christian than it’s ever been. Your efforts to change that went nowhere.

Rally all you want. Yell and kick and scream and preach about politics as forcefully as you can. When you wake up the next day, you’ll wake up in a country that’s run by overwhelmingly godless men who represent an overwhelmingly godless constituency. Eventually you’ll run out of moral pearls to cast at the political swine, and then what will you do? How is a Christian supposed to be “light and salt” in a society that is becoming ever increasingly hostile towards Christianity? The answer is found not in reforming society from the outside in, but from the inside out. The answer is found not in changing laws but in changing hearts. Not in winning debates but in winning souls. Not in conservatism but in Christ. Not in politics but gospel.

Yes, my friends, “Christ and Him crucified.” That, not a list of political agenda, is to be our only message. And that message is our only hope of reforming society. People will never care what Christians think about homosexuality until they care about Christ. Our only sure hope for society to be reformed morally is if it is transformed spiritually.

That is why, if as a Christian, you are truly concerned about where our nation is headed politically, you will find yourself less and less at political rallies and more and more at gospel ones. Christ wants Christians unified in politics, but He wants them unified in the love of God first.