Stupid on Facebook 2019.12.29

Every Christmas, Leftists twist Scripture to convince ignorant Christians to support Leftist causes. This year was no exception. 

According to Leftists, Joseph, Mary and Jesus were illegal aliens seeking refuge in Egypt, so if you support securing your country's borders, and enforcing immigration law, you're just as evil as Herod, who murdered every male child in Bethlehem under the age of two.

If you're an ignorant Christian, who doesn't read the Bible, knows little or nothing about history, and confuses feelings with critical thinking, you might be taken in by such sophistry. So, let's apply some critical thought, supported by Biblical, and historical facts to the claim, shall we?

Joseph did, in fact, take Mary and Jesus from Bethlehem (in Judea) to Egypt.

Matthew 2:13 Now when they [the Magi] had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.” 

14 When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed for Egypt, 15 and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, “Out of Egypt I called My Son.”

If you know anything about history, you can immediately see the problems with the Leftist narrative of the Christmas story.

Both Judea, and Egypt were part of the Roman Empire. Moving from Judea to Egypt was analogous to moving from California to Nevada. Joseph, Mary and Jesus never even left the political jurisdiction of the Roman Empire, and there was definitely nothing illegal about it.

When Herod died, Joseph moved Mary and Jesus back out of Egypt (Matthew 2:15), to Galilee, which was also a Roman province.

So, if your claim is that the Nativity story is prescriptive (tells us what to do), and not descriptive (tells us what happened), an honest person would conclude that persecuted people should legally move to a safer place within their own political jurisdiction, and leave that place as soon as the danger no longer exists.

But that's not what Leftists are selling, is it? That's because Leftists are liars.

Does the Bible tell us how we should treat immigrants, and refugees? Yes, it does.

First, the Bible tells us that nations are God's idea.

Deuteronomy 32:8 When the Most High divided their inheritance to the nations,
When He separated the sons of Adam,
He set the boundaries of the peoples
According to the number of the children of Israel. 

Job 12:23 He makes nations great, and destroys them;
He enlarges nations, and guides them. 

Acts 12:26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, 27 so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;

Second, the Bible tells us to respect boundaries.

Deuteronomy 19:14 You shall not remove your neighbor’s boundary stone, which the men of old have set, in your inheritance which you will inherit in the land that the Lord your God is giving you to possess. 

Deuteronomy 27:17 ‘Cursed is the one who moves his neighbor’s boundary stone.’
“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ 

Proverbs 22:28 Do not remove the ancient boundary stone
Which your fathers have set.

"But that's talking about individuals' property", you say? Why would respecting a neighboring country's boundaries be any different than respecting your individual neighbors' boundaries? If trespassing onto another person's property is immoral, what makes trespassing onto another person's country moral?

Third, the Bible commands us to obey the law.

Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.

1 Peter 2:13 Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, 14 or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. 15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men— 16 as free, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as bondservants of God. 17 Honor all people. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.

I see no exemptions for immigration law. Do you?

Nations and their boundaries are real things, established by God, who commands us to respect boundaries, and obey the law. Which means that, if we want to immigrate to another country, we must do so legally. If we are denied entry, we must respect the boundaries, and the law of the land we're trying to enter.

So, how should we treat immigrants among us?

Exodus 22:21 You shall neither mistreat a stranger nor oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. 

Exodus 23:9 Also you shall not oppress a stranger, for you know the heart of a stranger, because you were strangers in the land of Egypt. 

Leviticus 24:22 You shall have the same law for the stranger and for one from your own country; for I am the Lord your God. 

Deuteronomy 24:17 You shall not pervert justice due the stranger or the fatherless, nor take a widow’s garment as a pledge. 

Deuteronomy 27:19 ‘Cursed is the one who perverts the justice due the stranger, the fatherless, and widow.’ “And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

Leftists love to quote those verses, especially the last two, but think about it. What is the justice due to a stranger who violates the laws of the land by entering the country illegally?

Deportation certainly seems like a reasonable measure of justice due, doesn't it?

Christians; read the Bible. The whole Bible. Stop ignoring the Scriptures you don't like.

Another One Bites the Dust

Following closely on Josh Harris's heels (see here, here, and here), Marty Sampson, a song writer for Hillsong, announced on Instagram that he too is losing his faith. Mr. Sampson has since deleted his Instagram post, but other sources saved it, so here is the text, with some of my commentary.

Time for some real talk. I’m genuinely losing my faith, and it doesn’t bother me. Like, what bothers me now is nothing.

When a 40-year-old man writes or speaks like a valley girl, that always sends up a red flag in my mind.

I am so happy now, so at peace with the world. It’s crazy. 

This is a soapbox moment so here I go … How many preachers fall? Many. No one talks about it.

What? "No one talks about it"? Does this guy not have access to the internet? How does he post on Instagram? I searched for "when pastors fall", and found all kinds of articles and sermons on the subject. More importantly, Jesus talked about it, the Apostles talked about it. What is this guy talking about?

How many miracles happen. Not many. No one talks about it.

Again, does this guy not have access to the internet? I searched for "modern day miracles", and "miracles in the modern era", and found plenty of articles and sermons. Furthermore, few miracles happened in the Bible. There were only a few people in the Bible around whom miracles abounded - Moses, Elijah, Elisha, Jesus, and the Apostles. Outside of their ministries, oftentimes hundreds of years passed between miracles. 

Besides, if "not many" miracles happen, then that means some miracles do happen. How many miracles does Mr. Sampson need to believe? Does Mr. Sampson think God owes him miracles? The Pharisees demanded miracles from Jesus. He had an answer for them, too.

Why is the Bible full of contradictions? No one talks about it.

Again, where has this guy been? Here's a link devoted entirely to that subject. Pretty much every time I talk to an unbeliever about the Bible, he/she claims the Bible is "full of contradictions". When I ask them to name one, the answer is almost always, "uhhhh........ ". On the rare occasion that they can actually name one, I've always been able to resolve it for them.

That doesn't mean that I'm capable of resolving every apparent "contradiction" in the Bible, but it does mean that Mr. Sampson hasn't done the work necessary to understand the Bible. I'm not a church elder. Mr. Sampson is. Shouldn't he be better prepared than I am? I'd be embarrassed if Mr. Sampson was more knowledgeable about engineering than I am, because engineering is my profession. Mr. Sampson is a professional church elder. Why am I better prepared than he is?

How can God be love yet send four billion people to a place, all ‘coz they don’t believe? No one talks about it.

Are you kidding me? Everyone talks about this! It's one of the most common questions unbelievers ask! For crying out loud, man! Use a search engine!

I could give Mr. Sampson a much longer answer, but here's a short one. Yes, God is love (1 John 4:8), but God is also just, and justice means giving people what they've earned, and "the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23). Wages are what one earns. We've all earned death. And the second death is eternal separation from God in the one place where God's presence cannot be perceived (Revelation 20:14).

In other words, God will not only giving people what they earned, He will give them what they want - an existence without God.

Christians can be the most judgmental people on the planet -

So, Marty Sampson has judged that "Christians can be the most judgmental people on the planet", and Marty Sampson has judged that being judgmental is a very bad thing. Does that about cover it?

- they can also be some of the most beautiful and loving people. But it’s not for me. 

I am not in any more. I want genuine truth. Not the “I just believe it” kind of truth.

Oh, you mean the kind of truth that the Apostle Peter referred to when he (really, the Holy Spirit) commanded you to "sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you"? (1 Peter 3:15) You mean that kind of truth?

Why doesn't Mr. Sampson already have that kind of truth? He's 40 years old, and a professional church elder. How did he ever get there without even knowing what he believes, or why he believes it?

Science keeps piercing the truth of every religion.

Again; where's this guy been? Mr. Sampson is, of course, referring to evolution. If you have time, please watch the following video from a non-religious source.

Lots of things help people change their lives, not just one version of God. Got so much more to say, but for me, I keeping it real. Unfollow if you want, I’ve never been about living my life for others. 

That certainly explains a lot. 

All I know is what’s true to me right now, and Christianity just seems to me like another religion at this point. I could go on, but I won’t. Love and forgive absolutely.

Why? 

Be kind absolutely.

Why? 

Be generous and do good to others absolutely.

Why? 

Some things are good no matter what you believe.

Says who? Define "good". How does one measure "good"? By what standard? Why that standard, and not some other standard?

Let the rain fall, the sun will come up tomorrow.

Mr. Sampson's muddled, garbled, self-centered theology is precisely the problem with churches like Hillsong that focus on emotion above solid doctrinal teaching. When Mr. Sampson says over and over again, "no one talks about it", I suspect that he means "Hillsong never talks about it", because as I've demonstrated, plenty of people are talking about the difficult questions of faith.

Second, as I pointed out in my series about Josh Harris, in the books of Titus and 1 Timothy, the Holy Spirit, through the Apostle Paul, gave us the qualifications for a church elder. Like Josh Harris, Marty Sampson fails miserably to meet those qualifications. Why was he ever made an elder?

Because Hillsong's leadership doesn't actually believe the Bible.

And that leads us to the real problem.

Churches like Hillsong don't preach the Jesus of the Bible. They preach Buddy Christ. Mr. Sampson said that he has "never been about living my life for others". Buddy Christ approves, but the Jesus of the Bible says "If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it." (Matthew 16:24-25)

Jesus spoke the truth, because He is The Truth, but the truth doesn't fill stadiums with adoring fans. It never has. In John 6, Jesus preached a harsh message that deeply offended the people who followed Him. Please read the whole thing here. Buddy Christ is never offensive. By contrast, this is how Jesus Christ reacted.

John 6:60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, “This is a hard saying; who can understand it?" 

61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. 65 And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.” 

66 From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more. 67 Then Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also want to go away?” 

68 But Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

What will you do, Christian, when you read passages in God's Word that offed you? Because, I assure you, there are many.

Will you follow Josh Harris's, and Marty Sampson's examples, and spout nonsense about "my truth"?

Will you follow Hillsong's example and simply avoid those "offensive" passages?

Or, will you follow the Apostle Peter's example, and say to your Lord, "where else will I go? You alone have the words of eternal life." 

Buddy Christ

Why did I title my last post At Least He's Honest (For Now)? Why, "For Now"? Josh Harris wrote:

By all the measurements that I have for defining a Christian, I am not a Christian. Many people tell me that there is a different way to practice faith and I want to remain open to this, but I’m not there now.⁣⁣

I don't know what that means, because it's so vague, probably deliberately so. But, here's what I think. I think Mr. Harris will eventually settle on his own version of Buddy Christ.



Buddy Christ is the counterfeit Jesus most modern Christians believe in, and most modern churches preach.

Buddy Christ is not your Lord. He's your buddy. Buddy Christ demands nothing from you. He gives you no commandments. And he absolutely, positively, never, ever judges you. Buddy Christ is "spiritual, not religious". He doesn't dwell on antiquated concepts like sin, except for racism. Buddy Christ doesn't care if you're sexually promiscuous, practice homosexuality, mutilate your body to make it look like that of the opposite sex, or murder your baby in womb. But, if you're a racist, or a Republican (same thing, right?), you're in big trouble with Buddy Christ.

Wait... didn't I say that Buddy Christ never, ever judges you? Doesn't accusing someone of racism sound judgmental? Isn't that a contradiction?

Well... sure. But reason is a racist, sexist tool of the white patriarchy, and Buddy Christ ain't down with that, man.

Buddy Christ is a Socialist, because Socialism is compassionate. Buddy Christ is basically your dope smoking, hippie, dorm resident adviser from college, who's been in college for eight years because he keeps changing his major, and never studies.

Buddy Christ is Crawl from Son in Law. 

Buddy Christ is not the Jesus of the Bible.

Buddy Christ is inclusive. Unless you're a racist. Then he excludes you, which would make him exclusive, if we were using reason, which is a racist, sexist tool of the white patriarchy, which is why Buddy Christ never uses reason.

The Jesus of the Bible says things like;

I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. (John 14:6)

There are six absolute statements in that one sentence, and absolute statements always exclude everything that does not fit within the statement.

1. I am (no one else is)
2. the way (no other way)
3. the truth (no other truth)
4. the life (no other life)
5. No one comes to the Father (self explanatory) 
6. except through Me (through no one else)

If you want to get to God the Father through anyone but His Son, Jesus Christ (the one in the Bible, not your buddy); tough luck. You won't get there. You'll end up in the one place where God's presence cannot be perceived. In case you didn't know, that place is known as Hell. 

Don't believe me? That's probably because you've been listening to Buddy Christ, because Buddy Christ does say things that the Jesus of the Bible says, like;

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

Awwwww..... isn't that sweet? Jesus didn't come here to condemn the world! Jesus is all about love.

Well... yeah. But, why do Christians always stop reading at verse 17? In verse 18, Jesus said;

John 3:18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Sounds awfully judgmental, and exclusive, doesn't it? In fact, if you'd like to know if your church preaches a version of Buddy Christ, ask yourself; whenever your pastor preaches from John 3, does he read John 3:18, or does he stop at John 3:17?

But wait, it gets better. Because Jesus also told The Parable of the Minas in Luke 19. Please read the whole thing, but I'll summarize it for you here.

Luke 19:11 Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was near Jerusalem and because they thought the kingdom of God would appear immediately. 12 Therefore He said: “A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants, delivered to them ten minas, and said to them, ‘Do business till I come.’ 14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We will not have this man to reign over us.’

Who is the nobleman who leaves to receive a kingdom, and will return? Obviously, that's Jesus - the Jesus of the Bible, not Buddy Christ. Let's skip ahead.

15 “And so it was that when he returned, having received the kingdom, he then commanded these servants, to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.
........
22 And he said to him, ‘Out of your own mouth I will judge you, you wicked servant.....

....... 

27 But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me.’ ”

Sounds pretty harsh, doesn't it? Not at all like Buddy Christ, is it? But, that is the Jesus of the Bible. In fact, that's Jesus speaking about Himself, and how He will behave when He returns. Note that He will have those who refuse to be ruled by Him slain before Him.

Jesus is not your buddy. He is your Lord. In fact, He is your Lord whether you recognize that fact, or not.

Philippians 2:9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

You will bend the knee. It doesn't matter if you're a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu, and atheist, an agnostic... it doesn't matter. You will bend the knee. And you will confess that Jesus Christ is your Lord.

What does it mean to confess? To confess is to admit something that is already true. It's already true that Jesus Christ is your Lord, whether you believe it or not.

You can either bend the knee, and confess that Jesus Christ is your Lord now, voluntarily, or you can bend the knee, and confess that Jesus Christ is your Lord at the judgement, involuntarily, like the enemies in the Parable of the Minas, who were slain before Him. The choice is yours.

Now, back to Josh Harris.

Jesus Christ is Josh Harris's Lord. That has always been true, and it will always be true. It was true back when Josh Harris believed it, it's true now that Josh Harris has repudiated faith in Jesus, and it will still be true no matter what Josh Harris does in the future.

Josh Harris wrote;

By all the measurements that I have for defining a Christian, I am not a Christian. Many people tell me that there is a different way to practice faith and I want to remain open to this, but I’m not there now.⁣⁣

He's "not there now", but he can get there. How? By creating his own version of Buddy Christ.

You see, Jesus Christ is your Lord because He's your Creator, who created you in His image. Buddy Christ, by contrast, is your creation, whom you create in your own image. That's why he doesn't judge you. Josh Harris will likely create his own Buddy Christ, who believes everything that Josh Harris now believes, and changes his beliefs to match Josh Harris's beliefs as Josh Harris's beliefs change.

This is how the Bible describes a man who creates something, then worships it. Again, read the whole thing.

Isaiah 44:9 Those who make an image, all of them are useless,
And their precious things shall not profit;
They are their own witnesses;
They neither see nor know, that they may be ashamed.
10 Who would form a god or mold an image
That profits him nothing?
........
14 He cuts down cedars for himself,
And takes the cypress and the oak;
He secures it for himself among the trees of the forest.
He plants a pine, and the rain nourishes it.
.......
16 He burns half of it in the fire;
With this half he eats meat;
He roasts a roast, and is satisfied.
He even warms himself and says,
“Ah! I am warm,
I have seen the fire.”
17 And the rest of it he makes into a god,
His carved image.
He falls down before it and worships it,
Prays to it and says,
“Deliver me, for you are my god!”

Don't be a useless fool who worships a false Christ you created for yourself. Worship Jesus Christ, your Lord, the way, the truth, and the life, the only one who can take you to God the Father. You're going to worship Him eventually, whether you want to or not. You may as well worship Him voluntarily now.

At Least He's Honest (For Now)

On 17 July 2019, Josh Harris publicly declared that he is not a Christian. That's a good thing. He's being honest. He doesn't believe Jesus. For example, Josh Harris doesn't believe Jesus, when Jesus says that marriage is exclusively between a man and woman.

Here's what Josh Harris believes. 

Martin Luther said that the entire life of believers should be repentance. There’s beauty in that sentiment regardless of your view of God. I have lived in repentance for the past several years—repenting of my self-righteousness, my fear-based approach to life, the teaching of my books, my views of women in the church, and my approach to parenting to name a few. But I specifically want to add to this list now: to the LGBTQ+ community, I want to say that I am sorry for the views that I taught in my books and as a pastor regarding sexuality. I regret standing against marriage equality, for not affirming you and your place in the church, and for any ways that my writing and speaking contributed to a culture of exclusion and bigotry. I hope you can forgive me.⁣⁣

What does Josh Harris mean by "marriage equality"? He means that men should be allowed to "marry" men, and women should be allowed to "marry" women. What did Jesus say? 

Matthew 19:1 Now it came to pass, when Jesus had finished these sayings, that He departed from Galilee and came to the region of Judea beyond the Jordan. 2 And great multitudes followed Him, and He healed them there. 

3 The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?” 

4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” 

7 They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?” 

8 He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

Josh Harris and his wife are divorcing. I don't know why they're divorcing, so I won't address that issue. Let's, instead, look more closely on how Jesus defined marriage. 

“Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a [singular] man [male] shall leave his [singular, male] father [singular, male] and mother [singular, female] and be joined to his [singular, male] wife [singular, female], and the two [one plus one equals two] shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two [one plus one equals two] but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

Jesus made that statement. Does that statement leave any room for LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender... queer? questioning? who knows?)? 

Jesus starts right out saying "Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female'". In the very first sentence, Jesus repudiated transgenderism. Then, every noun and pronoun He used in the rest of His response, links one man to one woman for life. 

Jesus defined marriage as a union of one man with one woman for life. In other words, Jesus opposes that which Josh Harris refers to as "marriage equality". 

Josh Harris clearly believes Jesus' definition was not just wrong, or inaccurate, but downright sinful. Otherwise, he wouldn't need to "repent", or ask for forgiveness for once opposing homosexual "marriage". 

So, Josh Harris strongly disagrees with Jesus. They can't both be right. Who's right, and who's wrong? 

If Jesus was wrong, if he was in fact sinful, and in need of repentance, for opposing "marriage equality", as Josh Harris now believe, then Jesus couldn't possibly be a savior. He couldn't possibly be the sinless, spotless Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Christianity would then be false.

What if Jesus wasn't sinful? What if he was simply mistaken? 

Jesus said of Himself: 

I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. [John 14:6]

Note that Jesus said of Himself that he is the truth. He doesn't just know the truth. Jesus is the truth. He personifies the truth. 

If Jesus was mistaken about anything, then He can't personify the truth, which means He was wrong about that, too. Which means He was either a liar, or downright crazy. 

If Jesus is right, and He really is the way, the truth, and the life, then He is God, because only God could truthfully make such a statement about Himself. But if Jesus was wrong, then He's either a liar, or a nut. 

What would you think of me if I said; "I, Oscar, am the way, the truth, and the life. I don't just know the way, I am the way. I don't just know the truth, I am the truth. I don't just know how to attain life, I am the life." Imagine if I said that. What would you think of me? You'd think I was either a liar (probably a con man, cult leader wannabe), or outright crazy. Maybe both. 

So, if Josh Harris is right, and Jesus is wrong, then the only logical, honest thing for Josh Harris to do, is to repudiate Christianity. Like I said before, I wish more counterfeit Christians would follow Josh Harris's example. Here's what I mean. 

In 2013, the Barna Group polled Americans on the subject of marriage. It turns out that a lot of people who call themselves Christians think Jesus is wrong. 

In 2013, 30% of "practicing Protestants" believed Jesus is wrong to define marriage between one man and one woman for life. 50% of "practicing Catholics" believed Jesus is wrong. It's probably worse now, but even at the 2013 numbers, that represents millions of professing Christians. 

If you're a Christian, and you believe Jesus is wrong, I have to ask you; why are you a Christian? Jesus is wrong about marriage, then what else is He wrong about?

And, please don't give me the lame excuse that He was just a product of His culture. First century Hebrew culture did not define marriage as one man, one woman, for life. First century Hebrew culture defined marriage as one man, as many women as he could afford, for as long as he felt like it. Jesus' definition of marriage was just as counter-cultural back then as it is now. 

What about polygamy? Why does the Old Testament allow, and even regulate polygamy? Probably for the same reason the Old Testament allowed, and even regulated divorce: because of the hardness of men's hearts.  Note that everywhere the Church spread, polygamy came to an end. Why? Because Jesus defined marriage as one man, one woman, for life.

Note also that the qualifications for elders in the church include the requirement that they be "the husband of one wife" (1 Timothy 3, and Titus 1). Why would a church elder need to be "the husband of one wife"? Clearly, because elders are supposed to serve as an example to the rest of the men in the church.

In other words, believers took Jesus at His word. They believed Him, and they applied His definition of marriage everywhere they went. 

If you profess to be a Christian, and you think Jesus is wrong when He defines marriage as one man, one woman, for life; you have two logical options. 

1. Repent, and ask Jesus to forgive you. 
2. Admit the truth. Follow Josh Harris's example, and admit you're not a Christian.

There's no middle ground here. There's no "grey area". Either Jesus is God the Son, and He is right, or Jesus is wrong, He is not God at all, and Christianity is sham founded on the words of a man who was either a liar or a nut.

So, which is it, Christian? 

He Kissed Faith in Jesus Goodbye

Josh Harris is not a Christian. Before you accuse me of being Pharisaical, or judgmental, please understand that Mr. Harris said so himself.

Link to source

Here's the most relevant quotation.

The information that was left out of our announcement is that I have undergone a massive shift in regard to my faith in Jesus. The popular phrase for this is “deconstruction,” the biblical phrase is “falling away.” By all the measurements that I have for defining a Christian, I am not a Christian. Many people tell me that there is a different way to practice faith and I want to remain open to this, but I’m not there now.

If you were a Christian in the '90s - especially if you were in your teens or twenties, as I was - you probably know who Josh Harris is. If not, you may be wondering, "who is this guy, and why should I care?"

Josh Harris achieved fame and acclaim when he wrote a book called I Kissed Dating Goodbye. Family Life Today describes the book this way.

Joshua Harris' first book, written when he was only 21, turned the Christian singles scene upside down...and people are still talking. More than 800,000 copies later, I Kissed Dating Goodbye, with its inspiring call to sincere love, real purity, and purposeful singleness, remains the benchmark for books on Christian dating.

I never read the book, so I won't critique it, but I did get pestered about it all through my 20s (which is probably why I never read it). However; does anyone besides me see anything wrong with the picture painted by that description? Anyone who purports to teach millions of people is clearly setting himself up as an elder in the church. The Bible delineates the qualifications for a church elder very clearly.

1 Timothy 3:1 This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; 3 not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; 4 one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence 5 (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); 6 not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.⁣⁣

Titus 1:5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you— 6 if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination. 7 For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, 8 but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled, 9 holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.

Does anyone think that a 21-year-old, unmarried, childless Josh Harris met all, of those qualifications? I don't know any 21-year-olds who meet all of those qualifications. Do you? I would never expect any 21-year-old to meet all of those qualifications. Would you?

In fact, Josh Harris wouldn't have even qualified to be a deacon.

1 Timothy 3:8 Likewise deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for money, 9 holding the mystery of the faith with a pure conscience. 10 But let these also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons, being found blameless. 11 Likewise, their wives must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things. 12 Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. 13 For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a good standing and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

So, the first folly was letting a 21-year-old, unmarried, childless, untested novice take on the mantle of writing "the benchmark for books on Christian dating", contrary to all Biblical standards on who should serve as an elder. The second folly was taking him seriously.

Mr. Harris became head pastor of Covenant Life Church, a megachurch in Gaithersburg, MD, in 2004. He was 30. He resigned in 2015, after a scandal in which pastors, including Mr. Harris, decided "to handle a child sexual abuse case internally instead of going to police".

In 2018, Mr. Harris released a documentary called I Survived I Kissed Dating Goodbye that repudiated his first book. I actually watched that one. Here's a trailer.

 
His new work, and his "reevaluation" of his previous work, was hugely encouraging to people who oppose Biblical teachings on marriage and sex.

Then, on 17 July 2019, Mr. Harris announced that he and his wife are divorcing.

Link to source

He didn't provide any details, like whose idea it was, or who filed, so I won't comment on any of that.

And, now, Josh Harris announced that he's not a Christian.

My purpose here is not to criticize Josh Harris. Frankly, I find his honesty refreshing. Unlike the legion of counterfeit Christians who don't believe what the Bible says, yet continue to call themselves Christians, while abusing the Word of God for their purposes, Josh Harris told the truth. He's not a Christian. Good to know. Let's pray for him and his family. I wish more people who don't believe the Bible would simply admit that they're not Christians.

My purpose here is to point out to Christians the folly of ignoring Biblical requirements.

First, Christians followed a single, childless, untested, 21-year-old novice like some kind of spiritual guru, violating all kinds of Biblical requirements.

Then, Christians chose that spiritual guru - now 30, and married, but still untested - to pastor thousands of people, again, violating Biblical requirements.

Then, Christians tested him. Unsurprisingly, he failed.

Then, the former guru/pastor and his wife decided to divorce, violating even more Biblical requirements (read Matthew 19).

Then, the former guru/pastor repudiated faith in Christ.

Hey, Christians who followed a 21-year-old like he was some kind of spiritual guru; do you feel stupid now?

You should. It's not as though you weren't warned.

Listen, Christians; we don't get to pick which parts of the Bible we believe, and obey, and which we ignore. We don't get to ignore Biblical requirements just because we don't like them. The Bible is God's Word. All of it.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Got that? All Scripture. Not just the New Testament, not just the parts highlighted in red, and definitely not just the parts we like. All Scripture. If the Holy Spirit inspired the prophets and apostles to write something, there's a reason for it. Let's not ignore it.

Alternately, if we choose to ignore what is written in the Bible, if we don't believe it was inspired by the Holy Spirit, then let's follow Josh Harris's example, and stop pretending to be Christians.

Confusing Love and Service With Submission

Jesus washes the Apostles' Feet: John 13

Pastor Doug Wilson recently wrote an article titled 7 Reasons Why Submission is not a Dirty Word. The usual, predictable protestations ensued.  I won't address most of them, only the ones I assume to be offered by people who sincerely desire to obey the Word of God. Here we go.

1. "Yeah, well, Ephesians 5:21 says, 'Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.' You're taking the commandment to wives to submit to their husbands out of context!"

Of course Ephesians 5:21 says what it says. No one denies that. In fact, those who fixate on Ephesians 5:21 take Ephesians 5:21 out of context.

First, let's look at the definition of the word "submit". The word translated "submit" in Ephesians 5:21 is hupotassó (ὑποτάσσω). Its definition is:

to place or rank under, to subject, mid. to obey From hupo and tasso; to subordinate; reflexively, to obey -- be under obedience (obedient) 

Now let's look at the root words: hupo and tasso.

hupo (ὑπό): properly, under, often meaning "under authority" of someone working directly as a subordinate (under someone/something else). 

tassó (τάσσω): properly, arrange (put in order); to place in a particular order, appoint. Commonly used in ancient military language for "designating" ("appointing, commissioning") a specific status, i.e. arranging (placing) in a deliberate, fixed order.

Got that? To submit is to obey, to be under obedience, to work directly as a subordinate to someone else after having been placed in a particular order, arranged in a deliberate, fixed order, analogous to a military unit.

Given the definition of the word hupotassó (ὑποτάσσω), and its military roots, it's obvious that Ephesians 5:21 precedes a set of verses (Ephesians 5:22 - 6:9) that establish a deliberate, fixed order that explains which members of the Church are supposed to submit to which other members of the Church. Wives submit to their own (i.e., not someone else's) husbands (Ephesians 5:22, 24, 33). Children obey (submit to) their parents (Ephesians 6:1). Servants obey (submit to) their masters (Ephesians 6:5-6).

Why does Paul begin with wives? Because the family is the foundation of everything else. Rebellious wives raise rebellious children who become rebellious adults.

Obviously, Paul wasn't stupid, or unrealistic. In fact, he wrote the best treatise on human nature in his Epistle to the Roman Christians. He knew that it's human nature to abuse ones authority. He therefore (inspired by the Holy Spirit) tempered the commandments to submit to authority by commanding those in authority to love their subordinates. Husbands, love your wives as Christ loves the Church (Ephesians 5:25-33). Fathers, don't exasperate your children (Ephesians 6:4). Masters, treat your servants well (Ephesians 6:9).

2. "But... but... but... what about when we submit to our friends? What about the kind of submission between equals that we would characterize as amiability and good manners?"

That isn't submission. It's not hupotassó (ὑποτάσσω). It's a form of loving ones neighbor.

 3. "But... but... but... what about Jesus washing his disciple's feet? Wasn't that an act of submission? Didn't he teach that we should all submit to one another by washing each other's feet?"

No, and no. Let's look at John 13, the scripture that details that event.

John 13:3 Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power [note the hierarchy and authority in that statement ~ O], and that he had come from God and was returning to God; 4 so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist. 5 After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples’ feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him. 

6 He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, “Lord, are you going to wash my feet?” 7 Jesus replied, “You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand.” 8 “No,” said Peter, “you shall never wash my feet.” Jesus answered, “Unless I wash you, you have no part with me.” 9 “Then, Lord,” Simon Peter replied, “not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!” 10 Jesus answered, “Those who have had a bath need only to wash their feet; their whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you.” 11 For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean.

Remember the definition of the word "submit" - hupotassó (ὑποτάσσω):

to place or rank under, to subject, mid. to obey From hupo and tasso; to subordinate; reflexively, to obey -- be under obedience. 

Who was the disciple (hupo [ὑπό]: under authority, subordinate) and who was the teacher in that scenario? Who obeyed whom? Under whose authority did God the Father place all things?

Clearly, Peter was the disciple, the subordinate, the one under authority. Just as clearly, Peter obeyed Christ, not the other way around. Christ wanted to wash Peter's feet. Peter didn't want Christ to wash his feet. Christ told peter that unless Christ washed his feet, Peter had no part with Christ. Peter, then obeyed - submitted (hupotassó [ὑποτάσσω]) to - Christ, and Christ washed his feet.

Christ did not submit (hupotassó [ὑποτάσσω]) to Peter. Peter submitted (hupotassó [ὑποτάσσω]) to Christ. When Christ washed His disciples' feet, it was an act of service and love, not submission. They're not the same thing.

My two-year-old daughter is potty training. She still has potty accidents. Sometimes she wants Mom to wipe her poopy butt when Mom is busy with our six-month-old baby, so I have to wipe my daughter's poopy butt even though she wants Mom to do it. My daughter, then, obeys - submits (hupotassó [ὑποτάσσω]) to - me and I wipe her poopy butt.

Wiping another person's poopy butt is just about the lowliest, most servant-like act one human can perform for another, yet when I wipe my daughter's poopy butt, it's not an act of submission on my part. It's an act of service and love on my part. It's an act of submission on her part. They're not the same thing.

Love and service are not submission. Obedience is submission.

Christians who claim that Ephesians 5:21 commands all Christians to submit to all other Christians misunderstand the definition of the word submit (hupotassó [ὑποτάσσω]), or they confuse love and service with submission, or they're simply not thinking logically.

How can two objects be simultaneously "placed under" each other? How can two peers "rank under" each other? How can they be "under authority" to each other? How can they "work directly as a subordinate to" each other? How can they "obey" or be "under obedience" to one another? What if they take turns submitting to each other? Doesn't that violate the concept of working directly as a subordinate to someone else (hupo [ὑπό]) after having been placed in a particular order, arranged in a deliberate, fixed order (tassó [τάσσω])? In fact, isn't that the opposite of a deliberate, fixed order?

One has to perform some serious mental gymnastics to misconstrue Ephesians 5:21 as a commandment for all Christians to submit to one another.

4. "But.. but... but... isn't wifely submission just a cultural construct? Couldn't one argue that this is the position of the culture at the time and therefore Paul's admonishing so that the word of God may not be blasphemed was how the outsiders would have understood the ideal household?"

Sure, one could argue that it's a cultural construct, but that doesn't make the argument valid.

1 Cor 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Is that hierarchy - which includes God the Son and God the Father - an eternal, God-created deliberate, fixed order, or a temporary, man-made cultural construct?

Why do sincere Christians go to such absurd lengths to deny that the Bible says what it so obviously says? Because what the Bible says violates their feminist sensibilities, and therefore embarrasses them. Lest you think that conservative, Bible-believing Christians can't be feminists, remember the quote I keep repeating.

“Most people catch their presuppositions from their family and surrounding society, the way that a child catches the measles.” ~ Francis A. Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live?: The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture

American culture is thoroughly feminist, and has been for decades. The vast majority of modern American Christians - even conservative ones - have marinated in feminism their entire lives, and don't even realize it. They're fish who don't know they're wet.

Let's stop pretending that the Bible says something other than what it actually says. And let's stop being ashamed of it.

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.  

Exodus: Gods and Kings

Christian Bale is one of my favorite actors right now, and Ridley Scott directed some of my favorite movies (Alien, Black Hawk Down, Gladiator), but I have a really hard time seeing anyone other than Charlton Heston as Moses.