Sexual Ethics

Sovereign Grace Family Church iconSovereign Grace Family Church

3 views

0 comments

00:05
Tonight we are going to explore the subject of sexual ethics.
00:10
So let me begin with a little word of warning.
00:15
There will be language, it won't be anything that is off color in the sense of no crude language but there will be language of a somewhat scientific nature that may be used at certain points.
00:29
So if you are a squeamish person or you have a tendency to have difficulty with things like that, I would just encourage you to try to leave the room, maybe just try to have a little intestinal fortitude tonight, just kind of deal with it, but we will do our best to keep it as reasonable as we can.
00:59
Intestinal fortitude is a nice way of saying it.
01:05
When it is being recorded we say intestinal fortitude.
01:09
So the three subjects we are going to deal with tonight, as I try to each week have three main headings, is marriage and divorce, which honestly, and I want to go ahead and say this, this could be its own class because on marriage and divorce we could talk about family ethics, child rearing, roles of mothers and fathers, all of those things, but tonight we are specifically dealing with the subject of sexual ethics in marriage because that is sort of the subject and because we are limited on how many classes we do per term, we are not going to have a whole class dedicated to family rearing.
01:43
So it is just marriage and divorce, that is the first subject we are going to look at.
01:48
The second subject tonight, fornication, adultery and polyamory, and I will explain what those words mean when we get to that portion.
01:59
Then we will probably be at our break time about that time, and when we come back we are going to discuss the subject of alternative lifestyle issues, homosexuality and all the other initials that we become so common to use in modern vernacular.
02:18
So we are going to begin with the subject of marriage and divorce.
02:23
There is likely not a more difficult subject to discuss among professing believers than the subject of divorce.
02:31
Often people have very strong opinions on the subject, yet just as often they have not subjected their opinions to scripture, but rather they have based their opinions upon experience and they seek to interpret scripture in light of their experience rather than interpreting their experience in the light of scripture.
02:55
I want to begin by saying that the diversity of opinion on a subject does not mean that there is a lot of right views.
03:05
What it normally means is that there is a lot of wrong views.
03:09
That is just the reality.
03:12
God does not hold a diverse opinion.
03:17
He knows what is correct and what is not.
03:21
And in ethics our goal is to seek to conform to His view, not seek Him to conform to ours.
03:28
So, what I have decided to do on the subject of marriage and divorce is present you with the three most common views of marriage and divorce that exist within the history of the Christian Church.
03:48
The first view is known as permanence.
03:57
The permanence view.
04:01
Alright, so the permanence view, this is the simple definition.
04:09
Divorce and remarriage are never lawful in the eyes of God.
04:15
That is the permanence view.
04:18
Divorce and remarriage are never lawful in the eyes of God.
04:23
The second view is typically known as the semi-permanence view.
04:39
This states that divorce can be permitted, but remarriage is not permitted.
04:47
So, consider the difference.
04:50
One says you can't be divorced or remarried.
04:54
The other says you can get a divorce, but because you still have a covenant with that person, you are not lawfully able to be remarried.
05:07
The last one, and I don't call it this because, it's going to sound negative when I call it this, but it's just the name.
05:16
The last one is called the permissive view.
05:18
Don't take that as to say that I'm, usually you say permissive, that's a sort of negative term, that's just the name.
05:27
So, you have permanence, semi-permanence, and permissive.
05:34
So, what's permissive? Permissive would say that divorce and remarriage is lawful under certain circumstances.
05:45
Okay? So, you have three positions.
05:48
One, divorce and marriage are never lawful in the eyes of God.
05:52
Two, divorce is permitted, remarriage is not.
05:56
And finally, divorce and remarriage can be lawful under certain circumstances.
06:03
Alright, for many in the church today, even a discussion of the permanence view seems very radical.
06:17
It just is.
06:19
If you start talking, if I were to have this conversation outside of less esteemed scholars than yourselves, I imagine it would devolve very quickly into a fight, if not an all out brawl.
06:30
But I'm trusting you to be those esteemed scholars that I have just accounted to you.
06:36
Because I'm serious, people will get down and dirty on this subject, and will want to go to the mat on it.
06:45
But, and like I said, when you mention permanence, people say, that doesn't even make sense to me.
06:51
Because every one of us knows somebody who's divorced.
06:54
In fact, every one of us knows someone who's close to us that's been, maybe some of us have been divorced.
07:01
You know, so that situation, it just rings very odd to even say that divorce can never be lawful.
07:11
However, I do want to make a few points about the permanence position.
07:15
And I'm not defending the permanence position.
07:18
I'm simply going to explain why someone would hold the permanence position, because I would imagine it's the least likely position held in this room.
07:29
I don't know that.
07:31
But I'm guessing, because if I were in a room of less esteemed scholars, I know it would be.
07:37
You understand? And I'm not trying to kiss up to you tonight.
07:39
I'm just saying, if I were in a room full of people from many churches in Jacksonville, if I even mentioned permanence, I wouldn't get a chance to say anything else.
07:49
Well, Pastor, you know there's got to be exceptions, and it's immediate.
07:52
There's not even a discussion.
07:55
So what I want to do is I want to present the permanence view as best I can, so at least you would understand why someone would hold that position, because it's probably the least likely position held today in Protestant churches.
08:09
Everybody agree? All right, so let's move on.
08:12
Permanence seems radical to us, yet it certainly has history on its side.
08:22
Many of you know that the Roman Catholic Church takes a very strong position on marriage and divorce.
08:31
I want to quote to you.
08:32
This is simply a quote about their teaching.
08:37
The Roman Catholic Church treats all consummated sacramental marriages.
08:42
That means they were married in the church, and they consummated the marriage through the physical act of intercourse.
08:49
The Roman Catholic Church treats all consummated sacramental marriages as permanent during the life of the spouses and therefore does not allow remarriage after divorce if the other spouse still lives and the marriage has not been annulled.
09:02
You say, well, what's annulment? Well, annulment in Roman Catholic teaching is supposed to happen if the marriage has not been consummated.
09:12
That's what's supposed to be.
09:13
Now, it's not always that way, but that's the idea, is that you can say the vows, but if the vows have not been ratified through consummation, then you still have the opportunity for an annulment.
09:27
So it's different than a divorce, we understand.
09:31
They do at least define it differently.
09:33
The Catholic Catechism states this.
09:37
Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law.
09:40
It claims to break the contract to which the spouse is freely consented to live with each other till death.
09:47
Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation of which sacramental marriage is the sign.
09:52
Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture.
10:00
The remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery.
10:06
Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society.
10:12
The disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents, and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect, which makes it truly a plague on society.
10:27
End quote.
10:28
Pretty strong words.
10:31
Much of that's true, though.
10:33
I mean, it's strong, but it's interesting that that comes out of the Catholic Catechism.
10:42
Very few Protestant catechisms have such strong words regarding the subject of marriage and divorce.
10:51
Talking and doing are two separate things.
10:54
I'm not disagreeing with you at all.
10:58
And everybody who knows me knows I'm the Protestant's Protestant.
11:02
I'm not supporting the Roman Catholic Church.
11:06
I'm simply saying on this, they have at least publicly held a strong view.
11:12
So the idea of permanence has historical weight.
11:16
In fact, most of you remember the story of Henry VIII.
11:21
And we could trace the history of the Anglican Church back to Henry VIII, who wanted to have a divorce, and the church was unwilling to grant it.
11:34
So, and there's a lot, Anglicans would argue that this is actually a stretch of history, and it sort of is, but really a lot of the history of Anglicanism can be traced back to a man who wanted a divorce, and the church wouldn't let him.
11:47
And so he said, well, I'm the king, and I'm just going to become the head of the church.
11:54
And now if you go to England, you'll notice that the queen is not only considered to be the monarch of England, but she is also considered to be the head of the church.
12:07
She is referred to as defender of the faith.
12:13
So how did that come about? Well, we don't like what the church is saying.
12:17
We'll make our own.
12:20
Thought that started with all the denominations, didn't you? Well, no, it kind of goes back.
12:25
And again, it's a simplification of history, very simple, but again, it all sort of boils down to one man who wanted a divorce, and the church didn't want to let him have it.
12:36
So, moving on, I want to talk about the arguments that are made for permanence.
12:48
But before I do that, let me say this.
12:50
Modern Protestant churches rarely hold such a strong view of permanence for marriage, even though the most recent catchphrase that has become very popular among Protestants and Catholics, and I've seen it on bumper stickers, I see it on t-shirts, I see it on political flags, marriage is one man, one woman for life, or forever.
13:22
One man plus one woman equals four life.
13:25
That's what marriage is supposed to be.
13:26
That's a statement in a sense of permanence.
13:29
That's what it's supposed to be.
13:33
So what are the arguments for permanence? Well, almost anyone who hears of the permanence view will immediately retort and say, but Jesus made an exception for divorce.
13:43
Jesus gives the exception.
13:44
How can anyone say there's no exception? Well, what I want to do is very quickly have you look at the relevant passages.
13:52
So this is going to be a quick Bible drill.
13:54
Let's see how good you are at your sword drills.
13:57
How good were you in Sunday school? You got your Bible held over your head.
14:01
I want us to look at four passages, and I want to make note of something.
14:05
So I'm asking you to actually, when you read this, look for the difference.
14:11
One of these is not like the other.
14:14
Okay? So let's begin first with Luke 16, 18.
14:22
Luke 16, 18.
14:39
All right, who's ready? Read it.
14:42
Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery.
14:47
And he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.
14:51
Stop right there.
14:51
Was there an exception clause? Not there.
14:55
All right.
14:55
Quickly, Mark 10, verse 11.
15:05
And he said to them, whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her.
15:12
And? Does it go on to say and? Oh, verse 12 too.
15:15
Yeah, I'm sorry.
15:16
And if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.
15:21
All right.
15:22
Stop right there.
15:23
Is there an exception clause? No.
15:25
Okay, very good.
15:26
So we looked at Luke, we looked at Mark.
15:27
Both of these are Jesus speaking.
15:28
Now quickly go to Matthew chapter 5.
15:38
The whole chapter? The first 31, 32.
15:41
I'm sorry.
15:43
It'll be a long class.
15:46
Matthew 5, 31.
15:47
Who wants to read it? It was also said whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.
15:55
But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery.
16:03
And whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
16:07
Thank you.
16:08
All right.
16:08
So what do we see in Matthew that we didn't see in Mark and Luke? The word except.
16:18
All right.
16:19
So there is at least one passage, but I want to just for, just, you don't have to go there.
16:24
Just so you know, Jesus in Matthew 19 says essentially the same thing with the same exception.
16:29
So the word is, even though it's not in Mark and it is not in Luke, it's twice in Matthew.
16:37
This one's in the Sermon on the Mount.
16:39
And then it comes up again when Jesus is directly asked by the Pharisees.
16:43
Moses gave a certificate of divorce.
16:45
Are we allowed to divorce? And Jesus said essentially the same thing here.
16:50
He said whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, marries another.
16:56
Now, this should cause us, especially those of us who studied in the last course, How to Study the Bible, this should cause us to raise a few questions.
17:07
The first one is when we read Matthew and we read Luke and we read Mark, we are seeing something different in Matthew than is in Luke and Mark.
17:20
And so we have to ask the question, why? Why is it that Matthew's Gospel provides a different statement than is in Mark and Luke? Well, here is what the permanent position proposes.
17:36
Boy, that sounded like a lot of P's.
17:38
The permanent position proposes...
17:41
This sounds funny.
17:43
Typical Baptist preacher, I'm popping my P's.
17:46
Okay.
17:48
They will argue, and sometimes I would say quite convincingly so, that the reason why Matthew includes the exception clause is because Matthew is speaking to a Jewish audience.
18:02
Is that true? Yeah, Matthew is speaking to a Jewish audience.
18:06
If you read Matthew, you'll notice he uses more Old Testament Scripture than any of the rest of the Gospels.
18:10
He certainly addresses the Hebrew community more than Mark, Luke, and John do in the sense of how he speaks.
18:17
He's certainly the Hebrew Gospel.
18:20
In fact, there are arguments that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew.
18:23
I disagree with that, but there are arguments for that because of being so steeped in Hebrew theology.
18:31
So here's the argument.
18:33
Jesus says that if a man divorces his wife except for sexual immorality, he makes her commit adultery, or he commits adultery.
18:46
Okay.
18:47
Why did only Matthew bring up the exception? Here's the reason why the permanence view would say he makes the exception.
18:53
Because in Hebrew culture, when a person is betrothed to another person, they are considered, in a sense, married.
19:03
And if they are going to be separated from that betrothal, they have to have a legitimate divorce.
19:12
Remember the story of Joseph and Mary? When Joseph found out Mary was pregnant with Jesus, it says in the beginning of the Gospel of Matthew, Joseph sought to divorce her, even though they were not yet married.
19:24
Why did he seek to divorce her? Because he had to do a certificate of divorce because they had already been legally joined through the process of betrothal.
19:33
And so, if a betrothal creates a legally binding relationship, and then sexual immorality is found, then a betrothal can be broken.
19:45
And that's what Matthew is referring to.
19:48
Now again, I'm not defending this.
19:49
I'm giving the case.
19:50
I'm trying to be as fair to this position as I can.
19:53
This is what they're saying.
19:54
What they're saying is that the reason that Jesus makes the exception is because he's speaking to a Hebrew audience.
20:02
And here's another argument.
20:04
This is from a linguistic perspective.
20:06
Jesus says, except for sexual immorality.
20:11
The Greek is pornea.
20:14
You should know that word because it's where we transliterate our English word porn.
20:20
We get the word like a pornograph.
20:22
That's a photograph that's illicit pornography.
20:25
And it means illicit sexual activity.
20:29
He does not use the word adultery.
20:34
Notice that.
20:37
He doesn't say except on the grounds of adultery.
20:41
He says except on the grounds of sexual immorality.
20:44
You say, well, why? Well, the permanence view would argue because they're not officially married yet.
20:51
And there is a word for adultery because he uses it in the same sentence.
20:55
He says on the grounds of sexual immorality, you make her commit adultery.
21:01
So there's another word that's a different Greek word.
21:05
So that's their argument.
21:08
Okay.
21:09
Now, how would I respond to that if I held the other side? Well, I will give you a simple response.
21:17
I don't know that it's going to convince anyone who held that position.
21:22
But my response is this.
21:24
Whether Jesus said it or not in Luke or Mark, Jesus certainly said it.
21:34
So whether it is recorded in Mark and Luke is irrelevant if he said it.
21:38
I mean, the point I'm making.
21:40
Unless you're arguing that Matthew introduced it as the words of Christ.
21:46
And Matthew produced this language that Jesus didn't use.
21:51
But Matthew is making the exception and not Jesus, which I don't think they are.
21:55
Then really it doesn't matter that it's not in Mark and Luke if he said it.
22:01
That would be my first initial response.
22:04
My second response would be that pornea, while it is certainly not the word for adultery, it can include adultery because pornea is a broader word.
22:20
Pornea means any form of sexual immorality, which is why we use the word porn to describe pornography.
22:29
So it's not less of a word.
22:31
It's actually a greater word.
22:32
So that would be the two responses that I would give to that if I were defending the semi-permanence or the permissive view.
22:42
But there is another passage that I think is equally as relevant.
22:48
And it is often part of this discussion.
22:50
I want to invite you to turn to 1 Corinthians chapter 7.
23:02
I feel like a child.
23:02
I'm drinking a Slurpee or an Icy.
23:06
I feel like a five-year-old, but it's just so good.
23:15
We're going to look at verses 10 to 15.
23:16
I'm going to read this one because it's a longer section of text.
23:20
And I want to focus in on a few things.
23:25
1 Corinthians chapter 7 is a very interesting passage.
23:27
I taught through 1 Corinthians a few years ago.
23:32
And I remember coming to this and it was difficult.
23:34
This is not an easy section of text.
23:38
For a couple of reasons, not the least of which, Paul at one point says, I am saying this, not the Lord.
23:43
Which makes people say, well, does this mean this isn't inspired? No, that's not what it means.
23:46
What Paul is saying is Jesus addresses this and I'm addressing a different aspect of this.
23:53
This is coming from Christ.
23:55
This is coming from the Apostle Paul who still has authority from Christ.
24:00
He's not saying it's not authoritative.
24:02
And he's not saying it's not true.
24:03
He's just saying, Jesus said this and I'm giving you more information.
24:09
It's not less important.
24:12
It's just not the words of Christ.
24:13
And he makes a distinction between his words and the words of Christ.
24:16
So, having said that, that's exactly what we see in verse 10.
24:20
He says, to the married I give this charge, not I but the Lord.
24:24
The wife should not separate from her husband.
24:27
But if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband.
24:30
And the husband should not divorce his wife.
24:34
So, right there in verse 10-11, we sort of have an argument for the semi-permanence view.
24:41
He said, I'm telling you not to get a divorce, but if you do, don't marry anybody else.
24:44
That's sort of the semi-permanent view.
24:47
So, right there we sort of have an immediate, okay, well, maybe he's abusive.
24:52
Maybe there's a situation where they don't need to be together.
24:55
There's an unhealthy situation.
24:57
We can allow for a divorce, but she's not able to be remarried.
25:00
That's the way a lot of people would look at it.
25:03
That's the semi-permanent view.
25:04
Okay, we're not going to hold her to be in a position where she's not safe or whatever.
25:11
But we're not going to allow her to marry someone else.
25:13
Now she's like the widows or the orphans.
25:17
She's under the care of the church.
25:19
That's a new relationship.
25:21
Okay, verse 12.
25:23
To the rest I say, I not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her.
25:34
If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him.
25:40
For the unbelieving husband is made holy by his wife.
25:43
The unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband.
25:47
Otherwise, your children would be unclean.
25:49
But as it is, they are holy.
25:50
By the way, verse 14 is often used by those who teach infant baptism as an argument that the children of believers, even of one believing spouse, is holy.
26:01
And they use that as an argument to baptize children.
26:04
That's not the argument I want to have tonight.
26:05
But the point is, I just like to point those verses out.
26:07
If you're ever wondering some of the passages they use, that's one of them.
26:12
But you notice what he's saying here.
26:13
If you can live with an unbelieving spouse, and they all submit to being with you, then you have no right to divorce them simply because they're an unbeliever.
26:24
You stay, and you be a sanctifying influence in that home.
26:29
I've had people come to me and say, I'm a Christian now, I'm married to a non-Christian.
26:32
Can I leave this person and go marry a Christian? No, you may not.
26:37
I mean, that's just, you know, there's really no biblical warrant for that.
26:40
You now have a sanctifying influence on the unbelieving spouse.
26:45
But you, just an added thought, you really shouldn't enter a relationship like that.
26:51
We call that being unequally yoked, you know, when you have an unbeliever and a believer that get married.
26:55
That's not a healthy way to start the relationship.
26:58
That's not what Paul's talking about here.
27:00
Paul's talking about two people that were unbelievers, and one of them got married to Jesus.
27:06
One of them got saved, and now they're in a relationship with Christ, and they get to be a sanctifying presence in the home.
27:16
Paul says you need to be that sanctifying presence.
27:19
And later in Peter, we read about how the unbelieving wife ought to treat her husband.
27:26
Because it's often a difficult thing, but, you know, what are you doing? You're seeking to win him through godly behavior.
27:32
You know, being an example of godliness.
27:35
There's a movie that came out a few years ago, and I don't often point people to a lot of Christian films because a lot of them are not very well done.
27:43
But there was a movie called The War Room that came out, and it was about a man and a wife who were having marital difficulties, and the wife began to pray for her husband and go to the closet and really focus on that relationship.
27:53
And, of course, the movie gave them a happy ending because, as movies often do, it doesn't always work out that way, but it was a good, you know, had a few good touching moments of the wife really praying for her husband.
28:04
And I thought it was a good example of that Peter passage of what, you know, and it's husbands too, right? If your wife's an unbeliever, you've got that responsibility.
28:12
Alright, well, let's look at what it says now in verse 15 because this is really the contentious passage.
28:16
Verse 15 is the contentious passage.
28:20
But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so.
28:26
In such cases, the brother or sister is not enslaved.
28:31
God has called you to peace.
28:33
Alright, so, the permanence view would say this.
28:39
If a brother or sister has a spouse who is an unbeliever and they leave, they are free from the duties of the relationship, but they are not free from the covenant that they made.
28:55
Therefore, they are allowed to continue their life, but they are not allowed to remarry.
29:00
They don't have to pursue, but they can't go and start a new family because they are still bound to that person.
29:08
That's a permanent view, and they would take that.
29:11
The semi-permanent view is essentially the same, except they would allow for a legal declaration of divorce.
29:18
The different semi-permanent would say if you went down and filed for divorce and had your divorce because you've been abandoned by the unbelieving spouse, if you file for divorce, you're not doing a sin by doing so.
29:29
That would be the difference.
29:32
One would not allow for the filing of divorce on the side of the believer.
29:37
That would be the permanence view.
29:38
The other would allow for it.
29:40
The permissive view would say that this constitutes the second exception clause.
29:48
We've been talking about the phrase exception clause.
29:50
The permissive view would say there are only two exceptions to the absolute covenant of marriage.
30:03
The first exception is sexual immorality, pornea.
30:07
Because of alliteration and because I'm sold out to my Baptist roots, I like to use the A, so I do write adultery, but even though that's not the word, it's just for me, because it's adultery and abandonment.
30:18
That's the two A's.
30:20
So the permissive view would say there's two reasons why somebody could have a divorce, and legally and rightfully and under God do so, and the first would be adultery, and the second would be abandonment.
30:38
That's the two.
30:40
Now, I want to just one more, for another moment, just make a point about the permanence view.
30:47
The permanence view is based on the understanding that when a covenant is made, it cannot be unmade, or it cannot be broken.
30:59
The permissive view is based on the idea that a covenant can be broken.
31:06
That's the difference.
31:07
That really is, on a macro level, you have one side that says covenants can never be broken, not lawfully.
31:16
It's always unlawful to break a covenant.
31:21
The permissive view would say, if you are the innocent party, and the other party has broken the covenant, you're the innocent one.
31:34
If you're the innocent party, then you are no longer lawfully bound to that relationship.
31:42
And the two ways that the Bible gives, according to the permissive view, for allowing a person to be separated from that covenant relationship, is if a person is sexually immoral, or abandons the relationship.
32:01
Now, I want you to consider this, because I know, again, some of you have been in divorce situations.
32:08
I want to read this paragraph, because I wrote it very specifically.
32:12
No matter the position on the board, most teachers, including all the permanence guys I listen to, and there are a few that I listen to, Votie Bauckham is a permanence guy, John Piper is a permanence guy, these are guys who hold the permanence view.
32:29
Most of these teachers, regardless of where they stand here, would tell you that if you have been in a divorce, and you are now married again, that you are not to leave this marriage and go back to your other one.
32:42
Because that's what some people think when they hear the idea of permanence.
32:46
They think, well, what does that mean? I have to divorce my new wife and go back to my old wife.
32:50
That just compounds the problem, you see.
32:53
That just makes you a second covenant breaker, and it doesn't do any good.
32:57
So you understand, no one that I would listen to would say, okay, since I'm a permanence guy, all of you who are married, who might have been married before, you've got to go file for divorce.
33:09
Nobody is saying that.
33:10
At least nobody I would listen to.
33:13
But there are some, I'm sure, like with any extreme position, there probably are some guys who are out there saying that.
33:19
But it's the rarity who would say that.
33:23
Most of the permanence people would say, you are where you are now, and you've got to move forward from where you are now.
33:30
Okay? All right.
33:33
Now I want to consider for a second an additional thought.
33:39
If you take the permissive view, you are still taking a semi-permanence view because you'll notice there's only two reasons on the board.
34:03
And I've got to tell you, people who call themselves Christians get divorced for a lot more than that.
34:12
I mean, I've had guys come to me and say, I want to divorce my wife.
34:14
She doesn't make me happy.
34:17
I don't care.
34:19
I don't mean I don't care that he wants to get a divorce.
34:21
I say, I don't care if she makes you happy.
34:24
Your wife should make you happy, but the fact that she's not making you happy is not grounds for divorce.
34:31
I sat in this...
34:32
Amen.
34:35
If you didn't hear that on the recording, that was the best answer I've ever heard.
34:41
Johnny O'Neal said, love your enemy, and that's the best.
34:45
That's great.
34:46
That is absolutely true.
34:51
Well, I sat in this room doing counseling with two people, and the wife was a very difficult woman, and the man hated her.
35:01
But I say, I'm not exaggerating.
35:05
If murder were lawful, we wouldn't have been having that conversation.
35:13
He hated her.
35:17
And I told her, I said, you are a very, very vicious person, and you are a hateful person.
35:28
But I told him, that's still not a reason to get a divorce.
35:35
It's not a biblical reason.
35:42
So, even if you take the permissive view, you have to say, what does the Bible really permit? Now, there's a third one that some people will take by virtue of what they consider to be necessity, and it's a third A, so I do like to add it, and that is the A of abuse.
35:59
So we'll add it here, because even though it's not in the Scripture, that is often the third one which people will appeal to.
36:07
They'll say, if the man is physically abusing his wife, then she is legally, under God's authority, allowed to leave the marriage, because a lot of times he don't want her to leave because he likes abusing her.
36:20
So he's not going to abandon her.
36:23
And some people would see that as a form of emotional abandonment.
36:27
I think that might be a bit of a stretch, but it's how they justify that particular position.
36:35
I was talking to a brother of mine who's a permanence perspective.
36:38
Actually, I had an opportunity to sit down with a permanence pastor and really pick his brain and ask him, and he asked me some questions and we went back and forth, so I really had an opportunity to hear the other side really well, and I asked him about the subject of abuse, and he made a good point.
36:49
If you remember last week, I talked about the three spheres of authority in the world, the church, the world, or the home, the church, and the state, and he said that's when he would involve the state.
37:00
If he knew a woman was being abused, he would involve the authorities to have him removed from the home.
37:08
But I said, but you still wouldn't allow her to divorce.
37:10
No.
37:11
Okay, at least you're consistent.
37:13
That's a consistent perspective.
37:16
But he would do something.
37:17
He wouldn't just say, well, you're on your own.
37:20
Enjoy the abuse.
37:23
So that is the three positions.
37:25
I'm not asking us to solve the dilemma.
37:27
I'm giving you the dilemma.
37:29
I think there is an ethical dilemma here because there's only one answer.
37:34
I think there's only one right answer, and we have to come to that conclusion.
37:39
Yes, sir? Can I throw something in? Yes.
37:43
I want to hear it.
37:44
I'm just nervous.
37:48
I'm not going to jump on any sides on this because...
37:51
I haven't taken a side.
37:53
I've tried to present each one as fairly as I can.
37:55
What about Ezra 10? You have to remind me, brother.
37:59
It's a long book.
38:00
They come back from exile, and Ezra told them to abandon their wives outside while they were in exile.
38:10
That's a good point.
38:11
I hadn't thought about that passage.
38:13
It's a good point.
38:13
It blew me away when I saw it.
38:15
So it gives a level of disobedience to God, but then in the hands of the wrong person.
38:22
Wow.
38:23
I thought God said, but no, it must not have.
38:27
I was just saying...
38:28
Some people even make the argument that...
38:32
and I don't want to start an argument.
38:35
Some people make the argument that God, in a sense, in AD 70, decreed a divorce against the nation of Israel and opened up the door to the church.
38:45
That's a whole different theological and eschatological argument, but there's some people, again, trying to justify divorce, make that argument that God...
39:04
Yeah, that's what I'm saying.
39:05
The language that...
39:07
It was actually the book...
39:08
What's the author? Ken Gentry? He makes the argument in that book that God's divorce decree happened in AD 70.
39:17
But it was because of their adultery.
39:20
Yes, but again, it goes back to the issue here, right? And so there's, again, there's a many-layered onion, and I appreciate you bringing out Ezra 10.
39:29
That's a good point.
39:30
Brother, you had your hand up.
39:31
Well, he said it said abandoned, and there's a difference between abandoned and divorce, right? Mm-hmm.
39:45
Like how you were saying earlier, how if the husband's beating the wife, he would get the state involved and the state might come in and have them separate, but they still wouldn't be divorced.
39:58
Yeah, I think the argument of the permissive position would be if you're abandoned, you can seek the divorce yourself legally under the law of God, that you being abandoned, you could free yourself from that relationship legally if you needed to.
40:10
Yeah, I think that's the pressing on, because the idea is the person who's been adulterated...
40:15
That's not a verb.
40:17
The person who's been cheated on would also...
40:22
There's been a victim of adultery.
40:23
Thank you, brother.
40:25
The person who's been the victim of adultery would at that point be the one seeking the divorce, but the argument from the permissive side, they'd be legally right to do so.
40:36
So, yeah.
40:37
Okay.
40:38
All right.
40:38
So, I do want to mention one other thing before we move quickly to fornication.
40:42
That was a weird sentence.
40:46
And that is the question of polygamy.
40:52
Because, and again, we don't have time to go into this, but it is obvious that polygamy is very rampant in the Old Covenant.
41:00
We see it among even godly men who were sometimes married to two women, three women, sometimes a horde of women, as it is with Solomon.
41:11
And they do.
41:13
And they base their argument on the Old Testament Scriptures.
41:19
My argument on this has always been very simple.
41:23
The design of God is not polygamous marriage.
41:29
God's design was one man and one woman, and there were no spares.
41:36
They had to make it work.
41:39
It wasn't Adam and Eve and Ethel and Irma.
41:45
I mean, he didn't make a bunch of them.
41:47
It was one to one.
41:48
And so I think that establishes a foundation which is deviated from in the Old Covenant.
41:54
And then in the New Covenant, when we're given the elder qualifications, which is supposed to be the representative man in the church, right? The man who represents what it means to be a godly man.
42:04
He's to be, meon, gunakos, andrei in Greek, that means a one woman man.
42:11
Faithful to one woman.
42:13
Right? That's the idea of the one woman man.
42:18
That's what I'm saying, yeah.
42:19
That's the New Covenant.
42:20
So no matter what happens in the Old Covenant, I think certainly as New Covenant believers, we have the model of no polygamy.
42:31
All right.
42:32
And so I would say to the Mormons, you got a lot of other problems, but that's a problem.
42:39
All right, so let's move quickly for the next few minutes.
42:42
Let's look at the next section on sexual ethics.
42:45
That was marriage ethics, but it's still sexual in nature.
42:49
Let's look now at fornication, adultery, and polyamory.
42:53
What do the three words mean? Because not everybody uses these words anymore.
43:01
Some people don't know what it means.
43:01
I remember using the word fornication.
43:04
Polyamory.
43:07
Fornication, adultery, and polyamory.
43:10
I'll write that one.
43:16
Polyamory.
43:18
All right, so fornication is sexual intercourse between two persons not married to one another.
43:26
That's a simple definition.
43:29
Adultery.
43:32
I got this from the dictionary.
43:33
I thought this was a good definition.
43:35
Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than that person's current spouse or partner.
43:41
And I like that, the addition of the word voluntary, because rape would not be adultery, right? And you couldn't have charged somebody with adultery because they were raped.
43:50
So voluntary.
43:52
And I guess voluntary would fall under fornication as well.
43:56
We wouldn't say that a young girl who was raped was committing fornication.
44:00
So it's always a voluntary act in this sense.
44:04
Polyamory.
44:06
You know the word amore, love.
44:09
And poly means many.
44:13
So polyamory is the practice of engaging in multiple sexual relationship with the consent of all involved.
44:22
It is not polygamy, because polygamy means married to multiple people.
44:27
Polyamory has risen in popularity among people who are in what are called quote, open relationships.
44:35
Meaning, I can be in a relationship with three women, they all know about one another, and they all know that I am not limited in any sense to any one of them.
44:46
But I am expressing myself physically with all three of them at different times.
44:51
And they're aware of it, and they're fine with it.
44:56
You may think that sounds weird.
44:58
It is really on the rise.
45:00
It is very popular.
45:03
People don't want to be married anymore.
45:05
So fornication, living together, what they call cohabitation, has really risen.
45:11
But this idea of polyamory is based really on evolutionary social ethic.
45:17
The idea that I shouldn't be limited to one person in my sexual activity, because if I have good genes, I should be expressing their spread as much as I possibly can.
45:30
And I express their spread through having as much intercourse with as many people as possible.
45:36
And it's okay as long as everybody knows about it.
45:40
Since the sexual revolution of the 1960s, the idea of premarital sex has gained widespread acceptance.
45:47
Rarely do we find a television show or movie which does not feature such things openly.
45:53
This is a wide divergence from the days when even actors portraying married couples were not allowed to share a bed because they were not married in real life.
46:03
You know the first couple to share a bed on television? Brady Bunch.
46:09
Brady Bunch was the first couple, even Lucy and Ricky, who were married in real life, didn't get to share a bed on television.
46:20
You understand, the whole idea of two beds was never a thing.
46:24
That was never real.
46:27
That was introduced into the culture by television because they did not want to show two people who were not married sharing the same bed.
46:36
Nobody ever had two little beds.
46:39
It's always been one big bed.
46:41
It sounds so silly, but it is true.
46:45
You go ask your great-grandmama if she's still here.
46:48
Did you and great-grandpapa have two little beds? No, unless he had a sleep disorder or something.
46:54
No.
46:58
According to WebMD, by the age of 20, 75% of Americans have engaged in premarital sex.
47:07
That number rises to 95% if the person is not married by the age of 44.
47:15
And a lot of people aren't getting married in their 20s or even their 30s now.
47:20
Marriage is in a sharp decline as people begin to realize they can be socially accepted with no real recourse and live together in an openly defiant, fornicating relationship.
47:36
When I say defiant, I mean defiant against God.
47:40
And as I said, polyamory is the newest wave of increased extramarital sexual experimentation where it is readily accepted that not only will there be sex prior to and outside the marriage, but it will be open and honest and inclusive.
47:58
Now, it is clear that the Bible forbids fornication.
48:03
And if it forbids fornication, it certainly forbids adultery.
48:08
And if it forbids adultery, it certainly, by extension, forbids polyamory.
48:14
But the Bible takes it a step further.
48:17
The Bible forbids lust.
48:21
Matthew 5.28, Jesus said, you have heard it said, do not commit adultery.
48:28
He's quoting the seventh commandment.
48:32
And he says, but I say unto you, he who looks at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery in his heart.
48:43
My most downloaded sermon, by the way, I have, my sermon audio page gives me a report every month and tells me how many times my sermons are downloaded.
48:52
The number one most downloaded sermon I have ever preached has been downloaded almost 3,000 times is entitled Mental Pornography.
49:04
And it was my exposition of Matthew 5.28 as I was explaining what it means to lust.
49:11
And for some reason, that is the one that's gotten the most attention.
49:17
Mental pornography.
49:19
And yeah, it's available if you want to look it up.
49:22
Since the advent of photographic technologies, lust has become an even easier pursuit.
49:31
Now men don't have to go out to look at women.
49:34
They can stay home.
49:36
And it's not just men, but you understand what I mean.
49:39
I'm using the men in general.
49:40
People don't have to go out to look for lust.
49:44
They can do it from the comfort of home.
49:46
Yes.
49:46
I was really shocked, I wore it.
49:50
Oh, yeah.
49:51
Yeah, Ms.
49:52
Nancy is a counselor.
49:53
She's a certified counselor, so she counsels people.
49:56
Yeah, and that's interesting.
50:00
Yeah, it's absolutely happening.
50:02
That's true.
50:03
She said she's had two women who have sexual, excuse me, pornography issues who've come to her for counseling.
50:10
We often think of pornography as a very male-dominated thing, and it is, but it's not limited to men.
50:16
Certainly.
50:19
Most ethical dilemmas surrounding these sins are not so much what does the Bible say, but rather how do we apply the biblical mandate.
50:31
Some churches have decided that the threat of disease is too high, the temptation is too great, and so they have taken a position similar to that of the secular world, and they have decided to teach safe sex rather than abstinence.
50:49
And if you think I'm exaggerating, our church used to be part of the DOC, which is the Disciples of Christ.
50:54
Now, this is 20 years ago, better than 20 years ago.
50:57
The last time my former, the pastor who came before me, the last time he went to the Disciples of Christ National Conference, when he went into the room, they had a stand where they were handing out condoms as part of the event so as to promote the idea of safe sex.
51:24
It's just there, guys.
51:27
And so the word sexual is translated 31 times in the ESV New Testament.
51:33
It's almost always associated with the word immorality.
51:36
It's almost always that word pornea that we had on the board.
51:40
It really isn't a question of ethics as to whether or not it's a sin.
51:46
It is a question, though, of how do we address it.
51:50
The world would say you can't say don't have sex because they're going to do it anyway.
51:58
And the response often from people like me who tend to take a pretty hard line on this is we could say the same thing about murder.
52:07
We can't say don't murder because they're going to murder anyway.
52:10
So just don't have any law.
52:13
Don't have any rules.
52:14
But I do understand.
52:16
I want to hear what you have to say, but let me finish my thought.
52:18
I want to hear it.
52:19
I do understand the dilemma from the perspective of society when you have thousands of people who are undergoing sexual disease and they're trying to find a way that they think works.
52:37
That's a problem with ethics, right? Go back to our very first ethics class.
52:41
Remember we talked about different types of ethics? And remember we talked about utilitarian ethics? Utilitarian ethics would say the ends justify the means.
52:49
Therefore, we can't teach abstinence because it doesn't work.
52:53
We must give condoms and other forms of birth control and other forms of disease management.
53:01
Yes, sir? I was just going to say the prevalence of what you're talking about just shows both saved and unsaved.
53:12
Yep.
53:13
Absolutely.
53:15
And the thing is, I think an argument can be made that there was an increase after the 60s in the United States of the acceptance of fornication specifically.
53:28
But we cannot say that there was an increase in the activity.
53:34
It was just increase in acceptance because you go back in history, fornication has been a part of every civilization.
53:43
It's been a part of every culture group.
53:46
The difference now between what was in the 50s? The Aphrodite temple.
53:51
Yeah, exactly.
53:52
You go back 2,000 years ago.
53:53
Absolutely.
53:55
People were worshipping through sex.
53:57
And the temple prostitutes, both male and female temple prostitutes.
54:03
But what I was saying, the difference now before the 60s is there was at least an attempt to impose a cultural stigma against sexual promiscuity.
54:15
That stigma is no more.
54:18
Please, sister.
54:19
There were a couple of people who were noticing it and went and asked that lady and he was like, well, we don't want to really touch that because we don't want to lose her children that are in the youth group and want to still be able to minister to them and be very nice as well.
54:56
You know the scripture says you know that you are supposed to be done with it.
55:02
So then Levin led us the whole route.
55:05
But he wouldn't do it.
55:08
And it so happens that her oldest son just became a flaming homosexual.
55:18
He's all on Facebook with it.
55:21
And her daughter followed the very same pattern as the mom.
55:28
Soon as she became 18, she left the church anyway and she moved in with her 27-year-old boyfriend and she was all on Facebook with it.
55:39
But it was like you don't obey God and then you think your way is better, then this is how this yeast looks in your lungs.
55:54
Because it was such a sad, sad testimony that he wouldn't address this lady.
56:03
Everyone in that church knew how her lifestyle was.
56:08
But she was so open and friendly with everybody.
56:11
They just wouldn't set her down I asked her, I said, but you understand that this is wrong.
56:21
Oh, I know it's wrong.
56:22
But God would stand up and Oh God, I understand that you have a wicked and depraved heart.
56:28
That's what God did.
56:30
I love you so much.
56:31
I'm sorry.
56:35
No, you're right.
56:37
Sorry, that was funny.
56:39
He would not touch that.
56:41
And she ended up leaving the church.
56:43
Her heart is so much harder now.
56:47
And she is just something else to deal with the way she blasts different people now from that particular church.
56:56
I want to ask just I don't want to ask too much of an Was she a member of the church? Okay, that does make a difference.
57:04
It would make a difference to us.
57:05
For instance, if a person was in our church and was a member of the church and was living in sin, we would have the responsibility to go to that person and call them to repentance and then follow through with church discipline if they did not, if they continue to live in sin.
57:21
But if the person wasn't a member, you understand there would be.
57:24
And so that's why I just want to kind of I didn't know the whole situation.
57:27
And because we did have a lady in this.
57:29
I won't go through the whole story.
57:30
There's a lady here in that same situation.
57:32
And I contacted her.
57:34
Her daughter caught me in the hallway.
57:37
Pastor.
57:38
My mom's living with her boyfriend.
57:39
Is she going to hell? Right there.
57:43
Like eight year old kid.
57:46
And I said, well, I need to talk to your mommy.
57:50
But this isn't something you need to be involved in.
57:55
And so I contacted the mom, told her that the daughter was concerned.
58:00
Her initial response was, Oh, I'll talk to her.
58:02
Everything will be fine.
58:04
Slow down.
58:05
She's not the only one concerned.
58:08
And she ended up leaving the church.
58:09
But it wasn't because we made her.
58:14
It was because she didn't.
58:15
And she said the same thing.
58:16
God wouldn't want me to be unhappy.
58:19
He's brought this man into my life.
58:20
And this man makes me happy.
58:22
I said, where in the Bible do you find where God is more concerned with your happiness than He is with your holiness? I mean, where do you find that? So, anyway.
58:36
Does somebody have a question? I'm sorry, Daisy.
58:40
I want to give you one passage to write down.
58:43
We're going to take a break.
58:44
1 Corinthians 6, 18-20.
58:47
This is Paul's admonition.
58:49
Flee from sexual immorality.
58:52
Every other sin a person commits is outside the body.
58:57
But the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.
59:00
Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit? That's always used to talk about food and exercise.
59:05
It's not about food and exercise.
59:06
It's about sex.
59:09
And he's saying, it's not even about smoking.
59:15
I mean, you can expand the application, but the point of it is, Paul is making a very simple point here.
59:22
There are sins that have serious consequences.
59:26
And the one that has the most serious consequences is the one that you're doing to your own body.
59:32
And when you enter into a relationship of sexual immorality, you're entering into sort of a pseudo covenant with this person to both of you use your bodies in an ungodly way, which is supposed to be in a way that only a married man and woman should use their bodies.
59:47
So you're not only violating the bodies, you're violating the picture of the covenant that that is supposed to represent.
59:53
Alright, so we're going to take a quick break.
59:55
And we'll come back in just a few minutes.
59:58
I love my kids.
01:00:00
That was recorded.
01:00:02
I do love my kids.
01:00:03
Yeah, unless you have to take them down there.
01:00:06
JJ knew he was loved and that he was in trouble.
01:00:11
Alright, well we are going to spend the last few minutes, very few minutes unfortunately, because this is a big topic, on the subject of alternative lifestyle issues.
01:00:22
I don't like the term alternative lifestyle because that seems to indicate that it's an okay alternative.
01:00:29
That's not what I'm...
01:00:30
I'm just...
01:00:31
I didn't want to put in the syllabus LGBTQ.
01:00:35
You understand? So my use of the language is simply for the virtue of having an easy word.
01:00:45
Very recently it has been common to hear the acronyms used not only on television and movies, but also by politicians and even in the church.
01:00:56
We hear first about the LGBT community and now it's the LGBTQIAP and so on.
01:01:06
And each one of those has a different word.
01:01:10
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, intersex, asexual, pansexual and the list continues.
01:01:22
To say this is a new phenomenon is to be generous because it's not just new.
01:01:30
It's not even within my lifetime.
01:01:32
The language is really only a few years old.
01:01:36
That's this language.
01:01:38
Now we've always had the language of homosexuality and things like that.
01:01:42
But the modern use of these acronyms as a euphemism or a word is relatively new.
01:01:52
It was not at all uncommon in my youth to hear derogatory terms for homosexuality used frequently, not only on the field of play or in recess, but also in movies and in television.
01:02:12
But much of that has been halted today.
01:02:16
And that's not bad.
01:02:17
I'm not saying that's bad.
01:02:18
Name calling, derogatory language, bullying is not helpful.
01:02:25
But it does show how far the pendulum has swung.
01:02:28
Where at one point when I was a young boy, to use certain words was just normal vernacular.
01:02:35
Now it would cause somebody to be accused of a hate crime if they were to use that same language.
01:02:41
Many churches have come to the conclusion that the best way to respond to the rise in the situation is to affirm these lifestyles, these alternative lifestyles, as to be legitimate and godly expressions of the Christian life.
01:03:03
Some even go as far as promoting homosexual wedding ceremonies, hiring transgender pastors and worship leaders and other things.
01:03:18
Others have taken a hard turn in the other direction.
01:03:22
Westboro Baptist became infamous for its signs stating, God hates fags.
01:03:31
And they made headlines by picketing the most sacred of American activities, the funerals of our fallen soldiers.
01:03:40
What were you saying, brother? No, Westboro picketed.
01:03:47
And I think this is really a major issue with them.
01:03:52
They were doing the pride festivals and things like that, but they would also picket the soldiers' funerals who had died and said basically they died defending a godless country, and therefore they deserve to go to hell.
01:04:07
So Westboro certainly did not do any...
01:04:12
They didn't do anything to...
01:04:15
Tell me, brother.
01:04:17
Oh, okay.
01:04:18
Like I said, they didn't do anything to endear themselves to any side.
01:04:23
They didn't mind being hated, and they are still hated even today.
01:04:25
The pastor who was the pastor of Westboro has died, but the continued vitriol lives on.
01:04:33
What's that, brother? The movement lives on.
01:04:35
Absolutely.
01:04:37
So we've said there's two wide divergences, right? There's the side which would say let's affirm everyone in this behavior.
01:04:45
There's the other side that wears the signs or holds the signs that says God hates fags.
01:04:48
So again, you have a very wide divergence.
01:04:54
With such a wide divergence of responses from the church, it might seem as if the Bible is unclear.
01:05:03
And a few years ago, a movement began to try to argue that the Bible is, in fact, unclear.
01:05:11
Proponents of this view say that we have misread the passages which seem to condemn homosexuality.
01:05:20
They argue that in the relevant passages, Paul is not discussing committed homosexual relationships, but rather abusive homosexual actions which were common in the first century.
01:05:34
The book is entitled God and the Gay Christian.
01:05:39
It was written by Matthew Vines.
01:05:41
And he argues that God simply does not condemn same-sex marriage.
01:05:49
Here is his bio on Amazon.
01:05:54
I don't own his book, but I did want to see what the bio said about him.
01:06:00
So I went to Amazon and looked.
01:06:02
And it says, quote, Matthew Vines is the founder of the Reformation Project.
01:06:07
Couldn't have picked a name more close to my heart, but they have.
01:06:13
That is the name of the movement, the Reformation Project.
01:06:17
And listen to how it's described.
01:06:20
A Bible-based, non-profit organization that seeks to reform church teaching on sexual orientation and gender identity.
01:06:33
End quote.
01:06:35
So, as I said, we have the far extreme, that's the affirming, and they have their, if you want to use the language, scholarly voice.
01:06:46
They have their ones who are seeking to make an argument that the Bible just simply doesn't say what we have always thought that it says.
01:06:58
I have personally sat in on two public, moderated debates on this issue.
01:07:05
One was with Dr.
01:07:07
James White and Dr.
01:07:09
John Shelby Spong.
01:07:10
That happened, when was that, 15 years ago? You and I were together, went down to Orlando and watched it.
01:07:19
That was a doozy to hear Dr.
01:07:22
Spong, because he didn't make a biblical argument at all.
01:07:25
I mean, you can go back and listen to it even today.
01:07:27
His argument was not biblical, it was certainly emotional.
01:07:33
And how dare we not affirm someone and who they are.
01:07:38
And it was very aggressive from his perspective.
01:07:41
He would say it was aggressive from our perspective as well, or the side of Dr.
01:07:45
White.
01:07:46
But he certainly was not unaggressive.
01:07:50
The other one I went to was just a few years ago here in Jacksonville.
01:07:53
Dr.
01:07:54
James White and Dr.
01:07:55
Michael Brown had a debate against two local ministers here in Jacksonville.
01:08:01
Both of them homosexuals.
01:08:03
One a man and one a woman.
01:08:06
And they both also did not make arguments from Scripture.
01:08:12
And I challenge you, go listen to the debate.
01:08:15
Jennifer, you were there for that one too.
01:08:16
Were you there for that, Nancy? I heard it.
01:08:19
Anybody else in here go? Did you go, brother? Okay.
01:08:23
Did you think they made a biblical argument? And didn't even really seem to.
01:08:28
I have heard Matthew Vines.
01:08:31
Even though I haven't read his book, I've heard him.
01:08:33
He at least attempts to deal with the text.
01:08:36
Even though I disagree with his conclusions, they didn't even attempt to deal with the text.
01:08:39
So what often happens that I've noted is that often the issue is one that is sought to be won in the heart rather than in the mind.
01:08:48
Sought to be won in the emotion rather than in the intellect.
01:08:51
How dare you challenge these people who are so happy and friendly and loving.
01:08:58
And that's often where the argument comes from.
01:09:02
And there are basically two positions that are taken.
01:09:04
The first, LGBTQ is not a sin.
01:09:11
That's the argument.
01:09:12
That's the one side.
01:09:13
It's just not a sin.
01:09:16
The other side, and these are both arguing for the position, would say, it's a sin, but everybody sins, so it's acceptable.
01:09:27
Do you understand the two differences? Matthew Vines would say, it's just not sin.
01:09:32
That's the argument he's making.
01:09:34
It's just not sin.
01:09:36
The debate we went to, they said, I remember the woman particularly saying, everybody sins.
01:09:44
Which is saying, yes, it's sin, but it's okay because everybody sins.
01:09:53
When we look at the first argument, it's not a sin.
01:09:56
In a moment, we're going to look at some texts.
01:09:58
And I want to just give you some texts to think about that I think the Bible clearly says that it is a sin.
01:10:03
But on the other side, how would you respond if someone were to say to you, well, everyone sins.
01:10:12
Okay, brother, you want to take that? There's a difference in sinning and indulging in sin.
01:10:19
Indulging in sin versus falling short.
01:10:22
Okay.
01:10:23
Because we all fall short.
01:10:25
Sure.
01:10:25
Because we all have different struggles.
01:10:27
But if you're practicing righteousness, applying the application of God's word, that's not indulging.
01:10:36
You're actually trying to follow and walk it out versus indulging in sin activity on a daily basis makes it straight and totally disobeying God's word and His truth.
01:10:50
Yeah, and I would agree with you.
01:10:51
And I would take it a step further and say we would treat lying the same way or theft.
01:10:55
If someone says, you know, I'm a thief, but hey, everybody sins.
01:11:00
We'd say, yeah, you need to stop that.
01:11:03
I mean, you would say, if somebody said, well, I'm a liar, but everybody sins.
01:11:05
We'd say, yeah, you might as well stop that.
01:11:08
We wouldn't affirm a liar.
01:11:12
Neither would we affirm a thief.
01:11:14
And I've never seen a church that was established as the first openly lying church.
01:11:19
And I've never seen a church established as the first openly...
01:11:24
I'm serious.
01:11:25
The first...
01:11:26
Well...
01:11:28
They weren't...
01:11:29
They didn't have it on the sign.
01:11:31
I have never seen the first church of thieves, but we've all seen the openly homosexual affirming church.
01:11:44
So that is...
01:11:45
I think you're right.
01:11:47
The difference is you're engaging in the idea that it's...
01:11:52
Yeah, it's a sin, but it's a sin that's acceptable.
01:11:59
Yeah.
01:12:00
All right, here's a few passages to consider.
01:12:05
Romans 1 is the one...
01:12:07
If you ever do listen to Matthew Vines...
01:12:11
What? It is brutal.
01:12:15
Romans 1, 26 and 27.
01:12:20
Romans 1, 26 and 27.
01:12:22
The Apostle Paul is discussing God's wrath against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
01:12:32
That's verse 18.
01:12:33
And then he begins to talk about how they suppress the truth and what God does as a result of their suppression of truth.
01:12:38
And one of the things God does is He gives them over to a debased mind.
01:12:42
Then we come to verse 26 and it says, For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions.
01:12:48
For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature.
01:12:53
And the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty of their error.
01:13:03
So, it doesn't say homosexuality, but it certainly does use the language of men having a passion for one another and abandoning the use of the woman, which is usually where a man expresses his passion, is with a woman.
01:13:19
So, it's not as if it's a difficult concept.
01:13:21
It's not as if it's so clouded in euphemism we couldn't possibly know what it means.
01:13:26
It simply is not stated homosexual.
01:13:30
It's stated in the form of what they are doing.
01:13:34
But I think it's very clear.
01:13:35
Like I said, Matthew Vines would say this is not referring to a committed homosexual relationship.
01:13:40
It's referring to an abusive homosexual relationship as like those that were done in the temple prostitutions and different forms of the first century.
01:13:52
The issue and the response, I would say, is find me a righteous, committed homosexual relationship that God affirms in Scripture.
01:14:02
And you know what they often do? They say, well, what about David and Jonathan? And I say, well, what about Tom and Jerry? It doesn't have nothing to do with them.
01:14:09
David and Jonathan are not gay.
01:14:11
And there's nothing in the text to even insinuate that they are.
01:14:16
But they will look for those relationships.
01:14:18
Some even go as far as arguing Jesus Christ.
01:14:23
Yeah, because John said he was the disciple Jesus loved.
01:14:28
Yeah.
01:14:31
Ruth and Naomi, I've never heard that in my life.
01:14:34
And the whole audience was saying, what? It was like we were all like, I was like, okay, I'm going to throw a flag because that was a foul.
01:14:43
That was the worst argument.
01:14:45
That was the worst argument.
01:14:47
But yeah, I forgot.
01:14:48
Yeah.
01:14:49
All right, two more verses I want to point to too.
01:14:53
1 Corinthians 6, 9-11.
01:14:57
1 Corinthians 6, 9-11.
01:15:00
I'll read it to you.
01:15:01
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? So who is the discussion about? The unrighteous who will not inherit the kingdom of God.
01:15:09
Do not be deceived, neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
01:15:22
And such were some of you, but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of God.
01:15:29
Notice it says in verse 11, such were some of you, not such are some of you.
01:15:34
It's referring to the change that occurs when you become a believer.
01:15:38
But I also want to point out that there is a Greek underlying of this that often becomes part of the argument.
01:15:45
And I'm going to ask you to indulge me for an extra few minutes, because I know we're over time, but please excuse me.
01:15:49
I know you've got to go, but I'll make it quick.
01:15:52
There's actually two words here, arsenikoites and malikoi, that are translated in the ESV as men who practice homosexuality.
01:16:03
I think the ESV is wrong.
01:16:07
Malikoi in the King James is translated effeminate.
01:16:13
And arsenikoites is translated homosexual.
01:16:17
And you say, well, what's the difference? Based on history and use of language, malikoi does mean the softer one.
01:16:28
That's what malikoi means, the softer one.
01:16:30
And in the relationship of malikoi and arsenikoites, it was the active and passive participant in a homosexual interaction.
01:16:44
Now, I don't want to draw a picture for you, but you understand what I mean by the active and the passive.
01:16:52
So malikoi would be the passive participant, and arsenikoites, which literally just means man sex, koites, we get the word koites, and arsenos, referring to a man.
01:17:05
So arsenikoites is one who has sex with a man.
01:17:10
There really is no way to interpret it any differently.
01:17:14
So both active participants are addressed in this passage.
01:17:23
And we see this in 1 Timothy 1.10.
01:17:25
If you want to write that down, it's just another list of sins.
01:17:30
And in that list, it says the same thing, men who practice homosexuality.
01:17:36
That was 1 Timothy 1.10.
01:17:40
All right, let me...
01:17:41
Just very quickly, there are always objections.
01:17:45
One immediate objection is that Jesus never condemned homosexuality.
01:17:51
But that is irrelevant because Jesus would not approve of something that Scripture elsewhere condemns.
01:18:06
Jesus didn't talk about a lot of things that we know of because we only have a very small amount of what He actually said.
01:18:13
John tells us at the end of John, if all that He said was written, there wouldn't be enough books to hold all that He said.
01:18:21
So we don't know that He didn't say it, but people say, well, if it wasn't important enough for Jesus to deal with, we shouldn't be so concerned about it.
01:18:31
I would have a very hard time believing if Jesus were walking the earth today that He wouldn't say anything.
01:18:37
Another argument is that it isn't the church's place to pass judgment.
01:18:43
I often cite Matthew 7, judge not lest ye be judged.
01:18:46
Well, it isn't the church's place to go out into the world and hold up signs that say God hates fags.
01:18:52
But it is the church's place to call all men to repentance.
01:18:57
And if it is a sin, it needs to be repented of.
01:19:02
Probably the hardest question facing the church now is what if a person who comes to your church and has homosexual desires but is not acting on them, are their desires sinful? And this is actually a pretty big divide among Christian theologians.
01:19:25
Because the question is not as cut and dry as you might think.
01:19:29
Because the question is if a man came to the church and said, you know, I do have desires that are ungodly, but I'm fighting them and I don't want them, how do you respond to such a man? Do you say, well, even those desires are sinful and therefore you can't be a part? Or do you come alongside of him and help him in his struggle? That's the ethical issue that most Christian churches, that are holding firm to the truth of this being a sin.
01:19:58
I mean, Jennifer and I had a lady come to the church many years ago.
01:20:02
And she asked me to come to the office and talk to her after church.
01:20:06
We went in together.
01:20:08
She was married, but her husband was very sick.
01:20:13
And she asked, she said, Pastor, what would you say if I told you that I have ungodly sexual desires of a lesbian nature? I had to respond to her.
01:20:29
And I did tell her that yes, that is a difficult question, but, you know, I don't want to go into too far.
01:20:38
We did tell her that we would try to be an encouragement to her to continue to walk in a godly way and that I was glad that she recognized that it was a sinful desire.
01:20:48
And I would pray that God would take those desires from her.
01:20:53
Why doesn't it fall under lust, the same thing as lust? Well, the difference, I think the difference in this case would be lust.
01:21:04
Lust would be like mental pornography.
01:21:06
The way I define lust is typically mental pornography.
01:21:09
So if she told me I'm having lustful thoughts about all these women, I would say, yeah, that's a sin you need to repent of.
01:21:14
But if she says my natural, or my feeling is for women and not men, I think that's where the struggle is, is that feeling.
01:21:24
Dear, I don't know the answer to that.
01:21:25
I honestly...
01:21:30
But if somebody came to the church and said, you know what, I'm a recovering addict and I still have a desire for those drugs, but I'm fighting it, I'd want to stand beside them and help them fight it.
01:21:40
So that's how I would compare it.
01:21:41
That's the only comparison I could make is to say, you know, I'd want to stand with them and try to help them fight that desire.
01:21:56
Yeah, it's a difficult question.
01:21:58
Let me finish up with two things that I want you to think of.
01:22:02
There are two books.
01:22:02
If you really are concerned about this question and you want to educate yourself further, these are two books that I think are very helpful on this subject.
01:22:10
The first one is called A Queer Thing Happened to America by Dr.
01:22:14
Michael Brown.
01:22:16
It talks about the change in the American response to homosexuality over the last generation.
01:22:21
And it gives a very good outline of how the government has actually been used by the community of the homosexual, LGBT, whatever, to be used to force feed this into schools and other things.
01:22:36
So, A Queer Thing Happened to America, good book.
01:22:39
The other one, Secret Thoughts of an Unlikely Convert by Rosaria Butterfield.
01:22:45
She is a former lesbian who is now the wife of a Presbyterian pastor and a very godly woman.
01:22:55
We have read her book, her other book, Gospel Comes with a House Key.
01:22:59
Jennifer and I read that together.
01:23:01
So that's two books I would recommend on the subject.
01:23:03
It goes deeper than what we've been able to do tonight, certainly.
01:23:06
We dealt with a lot of issues tonight and sometimes it feels like, well, this might be simple, but nothing we've talked about tonight is simple, especially if you're dealing with somebody who's struggling with these things.
01:23:17
Pray for them.
01:23:18
Pray that God would give them the grace that he's given to you and even more so.
01:23:23
In Christ's name, let us pray.
01:23:25
Father, we thank you for all that you've given us.
01:23:28
May we go from this place with a desire to be in a closer walk with Jesus Christ and be more conformed to him in his name.
01:23:36
Amen.