Responding to Orlando

Greetings and welcome to The Dividing Line. Let me get out of the way of what might be distracting to some of you who watch. Yes, I am aware that my eye is all puffy. I hope that's not a distraction to you.

It's not as much of a distraction to me. A good workout this morning actually made it go down some, but no, I was not struck by anyone. I was struck by, well, the bee was doing 10 miles per hour eastbound.

I was doing 32 miles per hour westbound. The resultant, it wasn't the Babylon bee. No, because the bee lost. The bee left half of its guts on my glasses, but had enough left over to sit on my cheek and sting while I was trying to decelerate while going downhill at 32 miles per hour and rip my glasses off, get them off.

Unfortunately, the stinger stayed in until, I don't know, another 10, 15 miles when I stopped at a restroom and there was a fellow cyclist there and I said, does it look like there's still something in there?

And he looks and I go, yeah, it looks like it. And well, I managed to get it out then. But so it was in there for quite some time. And I woke up this morning and whew, it was really bad. But a good, solid workout will actually really reduce the inflammation a lot.

So it's hard to read right now and look down at stuff, but it's, hey, it's part of, I don't blame the bee. He didn't expect anybody to be coming along at that particular point in time. So I got no problem with him and he was just doing what his little bee brain said to do and I was in the wrong place.

So anyway, I hope that's not too much of a distraction for you because our topic today, we don't need any distractions as we discuss it. Once again, we come on the air shortly after a major explosion of violence and death and human evil that has everyone's attention.

And part of me is screaming, don't do this. It's too early, it's too soon. No one, well, almost no one will be fair to you in listening to what you're saying because obviously my primary concern is to once again, remind all Christians of the biblical command that we are to have the mind of Christ, that we are to think in a biblical fashion from a Christian worldview.

And hence we are to be very sensitive to how we might be influenced by our culture and by the constant pressure that our culture is placing upon us in how we are to think about situations such as this.

In this situation, the attack by a single Muslim terrorist against a, and interestingly enough, the first reports I saw downplayed this, but a well-known homosexual nightclub. At two o 'clock in the morning on Latin night, this situation brings together two areas that frequently I'm dealing with, but completely separately.

One's over here, one's over there. And very often those two do not get together. Though I have a number of times in the past considered doing a program on what Islam says concerning homosexuality, because some of you will remember that in the debate in Durban last year, one of the parallel texts in the Quran that I went through and demonstrated differences in how the Quran relates the same story had to do with Lot and Sodom and Gomorrah and the subject of homosexuality.

I didn't expand a great deal upon that at the time, but it is right there. It is important to recognize that that is right there and that there is a fair amount in the Hadith and in Sharia concerning the subject of homosexuality and the historic Islamic position on the subject does not differ much from the Jewish and Christian perspectives.

Though, obviously, because of the highly political nature of Sharia and the reality that you can't separate that out from Islam, there is much more in regards to law and to the execution of homosexuals in Islamic lands.

Most people are well aware that ISIS has revived these laws from the past that did exist in the past in some places. There's been disagreement, but it's always been illegal. The penalties have often depended upon the particular context and things like that, but it is well known that ISIS tosses people off the top of buildings when they are accused and then convicted of being a Sodomite or a homosexual.

Now, obviously, when you say accused and convicted, ISIS legal courts could be very highly questionable along those lines. But one thing that does need to be mentioned is there is normally a need for witnesses and there's supposed to be, anyways, a legal process involved that obviously becomes rather streamlined when ISIS is involved.

But point being, here we have two areas of tremendous discussion and thinking amongst Christians and they collide in this situation. One of the things we immediately see is the complete confusion of the mainstream media as to what to do here.

What are we supposed to do here? We can't say anything bad about Islam and, of course, pushing homosexuality is the whole reason we exist, it seems. So what are we gonna do now when we have a Muslim who is attacking homosexuals in Orlando?

With all that said, I am, once again, concerned by the tone of much of what I am hearing in the immediate response to the subject of what happened in Orlando and the interface between Islam and homosexuality.

Obviously, there are gonna be many people who are gonna disagree with what I have to say today and that's okay, I just want you to hear. I am going to seek to be consistent. I'm going to raise a number of issues that may be uncomfortable.

I'm going to disagree with some well-known people. And again, my biggest fear is that what I'm seeing more and more within the believing community is an abandonment of sofranismus, disciplined thinking, sobriety of thought, the fact that we as human beings are made in the image of God and therefore we have the capacity as image bearers of God to control our emotions and to engage in rational thought based upon principles of truth and goodness and honesty and virtue given to us by God in creation and in his word.

That should always be our ultimate goal. That should always be what we are striving for is that we would honor God by thinking carefully, by examining our own motivations, examining our own hearts, always looking at any situation like this as redeemed individuals, debtors to grace, but first and foremost, to be careful that we do not succumb to the spirit of the age and that we do not succumb to the fear of the faces of men.

Now, you may disagree with where I come down on this. That's fine. I just simply ask that you do so consistently, that you have a meaningful foundation, that you don't adopt a platform in regards to this subject over here that now is gonna contradict what you do over here.

We've gotta try to be consistent. None of us are ever 100 successful at that. We are all influenced by our blind spots and by our traditions and things like that. I understand that, I get that, but it's something we should always be striving for.

First of all, murder is evil in the sight of God. What Omar Mateen did was evil. It was premeditated. Those who are applauding him today, give evidence of their own radicalization within Islam by supporting what he did.

You must recognize that though the mainstream media is not going to hardly pick up, I've seen a few things here and there, but already numerous Muslim leaders, groups of Muslim leaders, mosques and organizations and so on and so forth, have decried the actions of Omar Mateen.

And unfortunately for a lot of evangelicals, the idea is taqiyyah, taqiyyah. They're just all lying to us. They don't really mean it. They're just doing that to keep from getting a whole lot of negative public sentiment expressed their way.

And once again, we have what got me in trouble, I don't know, was it six, eight months ago, when because of a similar situation, I tried to point out that we as believers do not have the right to demand of others what we will not grant to them in return.

In other words, I noted somewhere, either on Facebook or Twitter last night, or maybe it was this morning, I forget where it was. Anyways, some of you have already seen the video that Steven Anderson put up.

And, well, I'm sorry, it was last night and I was talking about Westboro Baptist Church. There's not much of a difference as far as attitude is concerned. Westboro Baptist Church comes out and I'm not really sure why anybody considers them overly relevant anymore.

Fred Phelps isn't around, but they came out and basically said, well, God sent the shooter and this was all judgment upon homosexuals and upon the United States and so on and so forth. And I immediately mentioned the fact that there were many people in social media who on the one side were refusing to allow for the fact that there may well be many Muslims who do in a heartfelt and consistent fashion condemn what Omar Mateen did.

There are many people who would say, I just don't believe it. They're all bloodthirsty murderers. And if they say otherwise, they're just lying because to be a Muslim, this is what it means to be a Muslim.

Omar Mateen is the representative of all of Islam. And then with the next breath, those same people will say, but don't hold me accountable for Westboro Baptist Church. I'm not with them. They're radicals.

They're nuts. That's a cult. Or this morning, Stephen Anderson puts his mug out there as he is wanting to do. And he needed his five minutes of fame. He feeds off of that hatred that he produces through his own behavior.

Sure sign of a cult leader. And he puts his video out. And how many Christians are going at? That's not me. Even Joel McDermott puts out an article. I didn't know Joel McDermott changed his view on the penalty issues on Old Testament law.

But anyways, he puts out an article. Would you zip it? Well, he's never gonna zip it. He's never gonna zip it until he's zipped. In other words, until somebody puts them away, which could happen. Little dry today here in Phoenix.

Did you see the predictions? My son sent me a screenshot for Chandler, Chandler, Arizona, Sunday and Monday, 1 .20. Mine only says 1 .19. Big deal. Anyway, he's not gonna zip it because he feeds off of that.

But the point is, we wanna be able to look at a Stephen Anderson, who we find absolutely reprehensible. Even, you know, the thing about Stephen Anderson, even when he says true things, because he's been interviewed on local TV here once, a number of times, and I watched one.

And what really bugged me was, half of what he was saying was true. But it was the, when you speak the truth as an individual who does not recognize your own need of grace, it becomes sandpaper. It just becomes screechy.

And of course, in our society today, any speaking of truth is considered to be screechy. But this is screechy on steroids. So, point being, if I, as a Christian, want to be able to say, don't hold me accountable to Westboro Baptist Church, don't hold me accountable to Stephen Anderson, don't hold me accountable to Pope Frankie, don't hold me accountable to Joel Osteen, what does that mean I have to be willing to do?

I have to be willing to hear a Muslim who says, what Omar Mateen did is disgusting. In my eyes, I repudiate it. It is hateful. It is wrong. Now, are there some Muslims who applaud him secretly and publicly condemn him?

Of course there might be some, but I can't look into people's hearts. And so there has to be a willingness on my part to recognize the differentiation here. Not only that, but you need to recognize something else.

In classical Islamic law, what he did was wrong. Why? Well, as we're gonna see here in a moment, there is a lot in the Quran about homosexuality. That's true. But the civilization that Islam built was not built upon lone wolves taking justice into their own hands and just going out and engaging in mass murders.

No civilization can exist when that is allowed. There was a legal system. I mean, the Sharia is so huge and complex and convoluted because there was this legal system and because you have these legal scholars who interpret things this way and that way and all the other complexities that come along with it.

But just simply on a classical law foundation, just simply deciding I'm the hand of a law, I'm gonna go take out a bunch of sinners just from a classical position would be something that would be completely wrong.

Just as we Christians would look at someone who calls himself a Christian and then goes out and takes the law into his own hands as a person who is operating outside the parameters of proper biblical morals and ethics.

If we want that freedom for ourselves, we've gotta be able to extend it to other people. It's just absolutely necessary. Now, there was a, and I tried to open it. It's one of those wonderful situations.

Rich was mocking me in here, because I was going, it's gonna take you 12 minutes to update. What are you doing? And he says, oh, I only thought Windows did that. I said, it's Word, it's Microsoft. It's not my fault.

It's not a native Mac program by any stretch of imagination. There are many statements in the Quran and the Hadith in regards to homosexuality. I'm not gonna take all the time to read through these, but let me just read you.

I mentioned before the text from the Quran. In Quran 780, and again, comparing these parallel accounts with one another, very interesting, I think, enlightening. But here is Quran Surah 7. We also sent Lut, which is Lot.

He said to his people, do you commit lewdness such as no people in creation ever committed before you? For you practice your lusts on men in preference to women. You are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds, and his people gave no answer but this.

They said, drive them out of your city. These are indeed men who want to be clean and pure. But we saved him and his family, except his wife. She was of those who lagged behind. And we rained down on them a shower of brimstone, then see what was the end of those who indulged in sin and crime.

Now, what's interesting is there are many today who try to argue that the Genesis 18 and 19 account upon which this is based is insufficient to really communicate to us anything in regards to homosexuality, whether it's evil or not.

They'll say it was just gang rape that was evil or anything along these lines. But what the Quran represents is accurate to the 7th century and how people would have interpreted Genesis at that time, even there in Arabia.

Parallel in Quran 20, well, notice in Quran 7, you practice your lusts on men in preference to women. So there's a specific focus upon the twisting of the sexual desire that is brought out in Surah 7.

And then in Surah 26, Aya 165, of all the creatures in the world, will you approach males and leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your mates? So again, there is a very clear emphasis upon the twisting of the male-female relationship in regards to homosexuality.

Nay, you are a people transgressing all limits. They said, if you will desist not, oh look, you will assuredly be cast out. He said, I do detest your doings. Oh my Lord, deliver me and my family from such things as they do.

So he delivered him and his family, all except an old woman who lingered behind. Then afterward, we destroyed the others, wearing down them a shower of brimstone, and evil was the shower of those who were admonished, but he did not.

So the point is that in all of these texts, for example, in Surah 27, the next Surah, would you really approach men in your lusts rather than women? Nay, you are a people grossly ignorant. Do you do what is shameful, though you see its iniquity?

There can be really no question. The Quran is very, very clear in interpreting the Genesis account as having as its primary focus the homosexual orientation and act. Surah 29, likewise. Then let's look at some of the Hadith.

By the way, you notice almost no one, well, nobody that I heard in any of the coverage that I have seen, and I haven't spent a lot of time digging through it. It's wall to wall, 24 hours, but very few people are gonna give you the specific quotations in the Quran and the Hadith, unfortunately.

I had put much of this stuff together, and then an individual well-known to me sent out a article today, putting them all in one file, which was very useful to be able to grab hold of these things. I had wanted to do something like that, bring all my notes together, and they basically did it for me, so I appreciate that.

Saved me the time this morning. In Sahih Bukhari, 882, 820, narrated Ibn Abbas, the Prophet cursed effeminate men and those women who assume the similitude manners of men. He also said, turn them out of your houses.

He turned out such and such person, and Umar turned out such and such person. So the Prophet cursed effeminate men. Narrated Ibn Abbas, Sahih Bukhari, 772, 774. The Prophet cursed effeminate men, those who are in the similitude, assume the manners of women, and those women who assume the manners of men, he said, turn them out of your houses.

Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas, this is Sunan Abu Dawud, 4 ,448. If a man who is not married is seized committing sodomy, he will be stoned to death. Narrated by Abdullah Ibn Abbas. And Abdullah Ibn Abbas is one of the primary sources of Hadith narrations, if you've ever read these.

Don't have the text on this one, but it looks like it's also in Sunan Abu Dawud. The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, if you find anyone doing as lots people did, kill the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.

Now, if you've got four or five different recitations in the Quran concerning lot and what happened there, then it's pretty obvious that the narration being provided is rather important. Let me see here, Abu Dawud said, from here I remember this tradition from Muammar and Musa.

Beware, no man should lie with another man, no woman should lie with another woman, except with one's child or father. He also mentioned a third, which I have forgotten. Abu Dawud. Sorry, I'm having trouble with the connection.

Please try again in a moment. You're most welcome. Thank you, Siri. You know what throws her off? When you have Arabic names. I don't know why, but she gets confused with when you're doing Arabic names.

And I'm not sure why she does that when she's on silent or she's supposed to be on silent. Yep, on silent. But anyway, you're not gonna say anything at all? What? It could happen to you too. You have an iPhone sitting out there, don't you?

It would never happen to you? I mean, all it means is you don't talk as much as I do. There is that, yes. Ibn Majah, 3, 9, 1903. It was narrated from Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah cursed women who imitate men and men who imitate women.

This is a Sahih narration. It was narrated by Abu Huraira from the prophets that concerning those who do the action of the people of Lot, stone the upper and the lower, stone them both. That's a Hassan, so it's not as strong a narration.

So, and then this one, now this one's important. This is from the Mishkat, volume one, page 765, prescribed punishments. Ibn Abbas and Abu Huraira reported God's messengers saying, a curse is he who does what Lot's people did.

In a version on the authority of Ibn Abbas, it says that Ali, Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law, had two people burned and that Abu Bakr, Muhammad's chief companion, had a wall thrown down on them. Now that, if you have followed much of the reports of ISIS and Al-Qaeda and some of these other organizations, that other than throwing people down off of buildings, the other one, the other punishment that's very common is to knock a wall over on top of people, which seems strange until you look at the sources from which they would derive these particular comments.

So there are numerous fatwas and things like that. These are the sources from which Omar Mateen undoubtedly was drawn. Now, once again, once again, we hear these things, we read these things, and the danger is that we're gonna go, well, there you go, there's that.

And at the same time, I think one of the reasons that I am so sensitive to this, and people aren't gonna like it because you're taking the side of the Muslim. I'm not, but I am saying we have to be fair because I'm constantly having to respond to people saying, well, we should ban the Bible because the Bible contains Leviticus 20 .13.

And I specifically state it needs to be read in its context. This is what it was saying. Yes, it is an abiding moral law, but this issue of the penalties, those penalties are given to a people who are covenanted to God for they themselves to be holy in God's sight.

And so we demand the ability and the right to contextualize, not to argue away or to run from, but to contextualize in a consistent fashion the texts that we ourselves consider to be the very word of God.

And I will not join with the world in condemning any religious text without giving the people who believe it, even if I consider it to be untrue, the right to A, believe it, and B, to define it within their own context.

Because once I do that, I know this world and its ultimate goal is to get rid of the truth, the scriptures. And if I've joined them in building up a basis for doing that to somebody else, then I have no basis upon which to try to defend myself once they start coming for me.

Gotta be consistent. Got to be consistent, no matter how strong your emotions are and how strong your feelings are and all the rest of that. You've got to be consistent. Now, I'm very thankful that many Muslims have already come out and have condemned this action and have said, this is not what we believe.

This is not in accordance with Islamic law. This is not how it's supposed to be done. I haven't yet, and I haven't had, got other things going on. I've got a funeral to do tomorrow. I've got busy, busy time.

Maybe there are some Muslims who have done some webcasts, put out some videos, written some articles, I don't know, where they have said, look, here's what Islam believes about homosexuality. And this is why we believe it.

And we do believe it's sinful. And we do believe it involves a perversion of the created order that God has made. And we're not gonna compromise on that. We're not gonna be embarrassed by what the Quran says or by what our law says.

But our law also says, here is the process it needs to be gone through and Omar Mateen didn't do any of these things. He took what he thought was justice into his own hands and in the process became a mass murderer.

That's what I'd like to see. And I have a feeling there are probably some out there. I just haven't seen them yet. Maybe I'll see some, maybe some folks will send me some information. I don't know. But that's what would be useful.

One of my concerns, obviously, is that incidents like this will be used. And this was one of the quote unquote true things that Steven Anderson said. It's just when you couch it within, you know, it's sort of like a pen can be used to write true statements.

But when you fill the ink reservoir with hydrochloric acid, the result isn't quite the same. And that's sort of what Steven Anderson is about. This kind of incident will be used to continue to promote the farce of hate crimes laws.

And hate crimes laws are a farce. They involve the legal system in trying to do something that it was never designed to do and can't be designed to do. And that is to look into the hearts and minds of men.

You make something illegal, you have a penalty for it. If it's gonna be binding upon the conscience of men, what is illegal needs to be consistent and something that is immoral. There has to be a moral foundation under all of this.

When you start making good things illegal, then the law becomes a farce. And that's where we're getting. Well, that's where we've gotten. We're already past it, actually. It's only getting worse. But he's right in that undoubtedly, this will be utilized to buy the homo sapiens homosexual movement to even further their demands for Uber rights.

Not equal rights, but Uber rights. We all see the Uber rights all around us. I've been saying this for decades and now you'd have to be blind not to see the fact that they want to be treated in a special way, better than anybody else.

Not equality, no, no, no. They want to be able to demand that everyone celebrate their sexuality. Not even gonna argue that one because it's too obvious for argumentation. But that's what's gonna happen.

It's gonna be used in that way. Now, let me mention, well, there's a couple things I want to try to tie together here and it's sort of hard to know how to transition at this point. I do want to mention this just in passing.

It's somewhat of a diversion, but I don't know where else to put it. I saw a note. I don't follow this individual on Facebook, but someone else does and they sent it to me. I was talking with a dear friend of mine last week about the fact that neither one of us for quite some time had heard anything about Dr. Robert Morey.

Dr. Morey wrote some books on Islam years ago and I have been a critic of what Dr. Morey has said about Islam. And most specifically, you know, I've been critical of his moon god theory. I think it's full of holes.

And I especially was critical of his behavior in his debates with both Shabir Ali and Jamal Badawi. His behavior was inexcusable. There's just, there's no excuse for it. And I've been critical of his insistence, for example, on reading one particular Hadith inappropriately so as to make just completely inappropriate comments, not only about Muhammad, but about Shabir Ali.

And you can go back and look at it. But the one thing that, and by the way, Morey's never responded to those specific things. It's always just sort of a general scattergun response. But the one thing that I was very strong in my condemnation of Bob Morey about, and I did use the term stupid, was his assertion that one of the best ways to deal with Islam is to nuke the Kaaba, to drop a nuclear weapon on the Kaaba in Mecca.

And the reasoning being that the fifth pillar of Islam, the pillar of, in regards to, well, it's not, well, by the way, just in passing, we are in the month of Ramadan, which is why we're seeing some of this stuff happening.

So much violence takes place during Ramadan. But the hajj, you couldn't fulfill the hajj with the Kaaba nuked. And somehow this supposedly would destroy Islam. And when someone first suggested it to me, I didn't know who had suggested it.

I said, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life. And it is, it remains this day, the stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life. There's just no question about it. The single thing that I could imagine that would galvanize and unite the world's Muslims who are primarily divided.

You gotta understand, there's all sorts of friction stuff, even between these, you know, between Al-Qaeda and Hamas and these groups. There's even friction between them, let alone the friction that exists between the Sunnis and the Shia.

You wanna get them all together into one big, really mean, nasty united army? Do that, do that. That'd be the one thing that would do it. Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep. You get everybody together on that. And so that was the primary thing that I focused upon was that that's just, that's just absurd.

Well, Dr. Mori wrote, I was thinking of brother James White and others who called my materials on Islam stupid. Now that the Jihad attacks in New York City, Virginia, California, et cetera, and now Florida vindicate my teachings on Islamic terrorism, will any of these brothers be man enough or Christian enough to apologize and say, brother Mori, you were right.

I apologize for calling you names and attacking your character and motives. Let us work together to defeat the Islamic takeover of the West. But given human pride, I don't expect them to apologize. It is sad when apologists surrender to political correctness and attack those men of God who sound the trumpet of Zion to warn the church and nation.

Well, Dr. Mori, you can think that that's what you've been doing. And you can think that I've said that all your materials are stupid. I didn't. I have focused upon very, very specific things and very, very specific behaviors as well.

And I stand behind everything I have said without any apology, because there's no need for any apology. I stand behind anyone who says nuking the Kaaba is an effective means of dealing with Islam, has no credibility whatsoever, period, end of discussion.

That's all there is to it. If you, sir, will repudiate that and apologize for ever having even suggested it, then we can talk. But as long as you're making statements like that, what can I say? I have no idea what this tweet means.

No one demands celebrating the Christian lifestyle ideology when they are killed by the hundreds by radical Islamists. I don't understand that. Doesn't make a lick of sense to me. Sorry. Anyway, looked interesting, but doesn't make any sense.

All right, let's get down to the tough stuff, because up till now, we're talking primarily Islam and some things like that, but that's not where the real concern is, is it? The real concern is this Muslim murdered, well, were there non-homosexuals in the club?

I'm sure there were. But in general, this was an attack upon homosexuals, and there probably were bisexuals and transgender folks and things like that that would identify along those lines. I mean, 2 a .m. Orlando, there probably weren't too many other places to go, and it does seem that this nightlife type thing is pretty common in cities across the Western world.

How are we to think about this? I've heard a lot of people saying that, well, for example, there's been a lot of quotation of Romans 12, 15. And Romans 12, 15 says, rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep.

And so we are to weep with the LGBT community at an event like this. And I hear that. And if what they're saying is, let's not be a bunch of Steven Andersons, because he's rejoicing at those who weep.

I get that, but I don't think that's really what's being said. Maybe for some, that's just not what I get. When I look at Romans 12, the first thought that crossed my mind is, this is talking about the body of Christ.

The very next verse is, be of the same mind toward one another. Well, that's not just talking about Romans in general, that's talking about believers. Certainly there's things here. Bless those who persecute you.

Those who persecute you is not within the body of Christ. I get that. But this sum pathe, this to feel together, sympathy, whether it is rejoicing together or mourning together, it's first and foremost amongst Christians.

It's similar to what is said in Hebrews. Those who are in chains, consider yourself sundetimenoi, bound together with them. And I'm a little concerned by the sort of the, just general broad brush. Well, I've expressed many times, a sincere concern in adopting the idea that sexual sin, gender confusion, open rebellion against God's law is a sufficient or proper or meaningful basis for the definition of a community.

I don't think there's a community of adulterers. I don't think there's a community of thieves. I don't think there's a community of slanderers. I don't think there's a, I just don't see what the advantage is or what the use is or how these sinful activities can provide a meaningful foundation for defining a community.

I don't get it. So when we look at what has happened, how has this self-identified community responded? And how should I as an individual Christian and then the Christian body, I realize so much in the West, in Western cultures, so much of what calls self Christianity isn't.

I'm not talking about mainstream denominations, whatever that, that's such a, the mainline denominations means nothing. It's an irrelevant phrase. It's never really had much meaning. It certainly doesn't have any meaning anymore.

I'm talking about believing Christians here, serious believing Christians. Oh, okay. I do, I got a clarification on Twitter. It's hard to talk and read at the same time. The person I read said, it means that after this horrible crime, there is a cry from the public to be more accepting regarding the LGBT lifestyle.

And it never works the other way around. I hope I made myself clear. Yeah, so in other words, when you see the murder of Christians by ISIS, genocide, so on and so forth, you don't see the media and the culture at large saying, well, there needs to be even more acceptance of Christian values and Christian people.

Yeah, most definitely. There's the inconsistency of the media is not something that's overly difficult to recognize. As believers, as true believers in Christ, how do we respond to the death of a sinner without at the same time saying that what we believe about sin and punishment is irrelevant?

That's where the balance has to be found. Let's be honest with ourselves. If 50 people blew themselves up in a meth lab, let's say it was some huge meth lab hidden away in a major city and drug dealers are cooking away and boom, the whole place goes up, which I've been told is actually sort of hard to keep that from not happening.

But the whole place goes up, 50 people lose their lives. There wouldn't be anyone saying that we need to mourn with the drug dealer community. Why not? Why not? Well, because there's no movement to demand that we give Uber rights to drug dealers.

What they were doing was sinful and they lost their lives in the midst of that. And no one that I can even imagine would go, well, we really need to be sympathetic. Well, how would you express your sympathy?

I mean, you express your sympathy to an individual. If someone had a son that rebelled against them and became a drug dealer, then yeah, you would mourn the loss of the potentially good life and the accomplishments that could have been that young persons and things like that.

And you could express anger toward the lifestyle that destroyed them and toward the greed and the effect of drugs. And there's all sorts of things you could do there and you would express your grief in that way.

But let's face it, today, there's still maybe people who will say, yes, homosexuality is wrong, but in our society to actually function on the basis, that it's a life destroying rebellious activity, not allowed to.

Not even in the church. Not even in the church. That's not allowed to figure into your thinking so that the result is we can't look at the Pulse nightclub and go, well, here, let's put it this way. Ask yourself a question.

Ask yourself this question. How would the Puritans have responded to a similar situation and why, if it was a different response, would it be a different response than today? How would Spurgeon have responded?

Back then, some horrific loss of life, and it happened a whole lot more often than it happens today. I'm not talking about terrorism. I'm talking about building collapses and fires and all sorts of things like that, especially in big cities.

Happened a lot. There'll be a lot of death. And how would they have responded? Unlike us today, men up until secularism started sapping all of us of our commitment were quick to recognize God's wrath against sin.

They were. They were. Look back in the history of our own nation. During a civil war, lose a major battle, God's punishing us. Same thing in England. God's punishing us. This is God's punishment. You don't hear that today.

It's impossible for anyone to even say that today and be taken seriously. Well, God doesn't punish anybody anymore. Yeah, I know. Romans 1 says God's wrath is being revealed, but we really don't believe that.

I mean, we'll keep that over here, but not over here. The result is that there can be no discussion of the fact that if you are cut off, if you die as an unrepentant sinner in rebellion against God, you will face the just wrath of the thrice holy God and you will have no way to stand in his presence.

Is that not the plain biblical teaching? You will die in your sins. Those who practice these things will not inherit the kingdom of God. How many times does it have to be said? There isn't any question that that's the message in the New Testament, but it is an offensive message to the natural man.