Words of Truth

This post is for my gay friends and those who support gay rights, gay marriage, and the associated views.

I have a question for you: Should any consenting single adult be legally allowed to marry any other single consenting adult? Specifically applied, should an adult man be allowed to marry his own mother? Should an adult woman be allowed to marry her own father? Why or why not?

Let’s call this Oedipality (after the story of Oedipus, a Greek man who married his own mother). Obviously I take the biblical view, that based on passages in both the Old Testament and the New Testament, marrying your mother or father is wrong.

But I have heard a large number of people in the past decade clamoring for gay marriage, and their argument is that I cannot apply the standards of the Bible to our country. I have said, “If a man can marry another man, then what is to prevent a woman marrying her dog?” And the answer I get is that the dog isn’t human and therefore cannot give consent. So now I ask the same question for two consenting adult humans who happen to be directly genetically related.

Is it wrong? If you say no, it’s not wrong, then we can argue the issue on its merits. If you say that it IS wrong, however, I want to know why. And don’t just give me the easy answer “obviously.” Tell me WHY it’s wrong. And you can’t use the Bible, because by your own admission, the Bible cannot be applied to this issue. And you can’t say “because society says so” because society said homosexuality was “wrong” until the past several decades.
So what do you think?

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I did not go to law school. I have not taken the bar exam, nor am I a paralegal. I have no experience in governmental affairs. I’m just watching from the cheap seats here.

As a child, I was taught about how our government works. I was taught that ultimately the politicians answer to the people of the United States. You know, “we the people”? However, our country is NOT a democracy, it is a “federal republic.” That means the citizens elect representatives, and the representatives gather together and run the country. If the citizens don’t like what the representatives are doing, they can vote them out of office. In this way, we the people are in charge.

However, I don’t understand, and maybe someone can explain it to me: how can a constitutional amendment be unconstitutional? In the past several years I have watched as several state legislatures have passed laws defining marriage as being between a man and a woman. I have then watched as activist judges have decided that the will of the people’s elected representatives is illegal. So the states had referendums and constitutional amendments. The people voted to amend their state constitutions in AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, FL, GA, ID, KS, KY, LA, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA and WI. That’s 30 states. And yet it seems that every day I hear of another judge who rules a same sex ban as “unconstitutional” and decides that HE knows what is best for our country, in direct opposition to the will of the people.

And so I ask: who’s in charge? I know in my home state of Iowa the Iowa Supreme Court decided that the Iowa legislature was wrong for defending marriage. And the people of Iowa responded by voting three of those judges out. Perhaps we need some more of that for these judicial overreaches.

Mather Byles once famously said, “Which is better – to be ruled by one tyrant three thousand miles away or by three thousand tyrants one mile away?” I submit to you that at present we are being ruled by nine tyrants right here in our own country.

Buckle up, this is a long one.

I was saved at the age of 16. I immediately began to immerse myself in the Bible, and I soaked it up like a sponge. But as a baby Christian, my doctrine stopped at Revelation 22:21. In other words, I studied the Bible, and nothing else.

My first hint that there were labels for the different doctrines, and beliefs referencing things outside the Bible (such as Martin Luther, etc) was when I was on the Talents for Christ tour in 1993. For those of you who don’t know what this is, I will explain. “Talents for Christ” is a nationwide high school competition where Regular Baptist high school students meet in each state of the competition and compete for the privilege of going to the national competition. The categories are varied, and mostly musical, but there is scholarship money for the winners, and the national competition is at the GARBC national conference.

The “tour” that I was on is for winners at the state level. Every 1st place and 2nd place finisher in each category is invited to go on tour, but not every one does. The group of kids is led by a pastor and they spend a week driving across the state going to different churches, using the talents that God has given them to glorify Him. I competed in the “Bible Knowledge” category, where you essentially memorized a passage of Scripture, and then were tested on it. My first year the passage was Luke chapters 13-24, and my second (and final) year it was the book of Romans. Yes, the whole thing.

My first year I came in second (some girl from Forest City, IA beat me), and I went on tour. My second year I came in first (she graduated, evidently), and went to Nationals. I thought, “Alright! I get to travel!” I mean, the year before Nationals were in Milwaukee, I believe. Where were the nationals being held the year I went? That’s right: Des Moines. So I got to travel downtown. At least I didn’t have to pay for a hotel. I went on tour the second year as well. And that’s when I met Christa. I remember vividly sitting in a wading pool of a water park in Ottumwa, Iowa, talking to Christa. I was a teenage boy talking to a teenage girl. She was a theologian talking to a baby Christian. I still remember her question, “Are you a Calvinist or an Arminian?” She may as well have asked me what my dress size was, for all I knew about her question. All I can say is that she is her father’s daughter (He is my favorite theology professor, a man I hold in high esteem).

After I learned more about Calvinism and Arminianism, I began to ask myself the same question. As I studied the Scriptures, I began to identify myself as a Calvinist, and if pressed, I will still come down on that label, but….

In 2005 we moved to Indiana and searched for a Bible-believing church that agreed with our doctrine, music philosophy, and worship style. We looked for a GARBC church because that was what we knew as “good churches”, but the only ones in our area that we could find used CCM in their services or had no young people whatsoever. Long story short, we ended up at Trinity Baptist Church, which is an independent fundamental Baptist church. They have a conservative music philosophy (like us), and a review of their doctrinal statement revealed no glaring differences. So we became members and began serving God there.

It wasn’t until a few years later that we found out some members disagreed with Calvinism, while others viewed Calvinism as dangerous and heretical. Color me shocked! I remember the first time I got a clue about it. We had just sung “There’s a New Name Written Down In Glory”, and I mentioned to the song leader that “technically, there are no new names if you believe in predestination” to which he replied, “I don’t.” I was taken aback. I mean, we agreed on everything else, so how could we disagree on something like this?

I have made my peace for the most part with the fact that my fellow church members, whom I love, disagree with my stand in this area, but I have studied the issue, and as Martin Luther said, “Here I stand. I can do no other.”

I have always referred to myself as a “Four point Calvinist” (the theological term is “Amyraldist”) because I don’t believe in the doctrine of limited atonement. I believe the Bible teaches that Christ died for all human beings. I don’t think you can put a value on the blood of Christ. I believe the phrase is “sufficient for all, efficacious for the elect.” (His blood was sufficient to cover the sins of all mankind, but only actually covers the sins of the elect, since the non-elect persist in their choice against God). But am I a Calvinist? I read things on the internet describing what “Calvinists” believe, and I don’t believe those things. Am I a Calvinist and those people don’t understand Calvinism, or do I misunderstand Calvinism, and those people are right?

Here’s what I believe about the four points of Calvinism (TULIP minus the L):

T: Total Depravity. I believe this means that we are incapable of pleasing God. It means we are all sinful beings worthy of God’s wrath. There is nothing in us that makes God look on us favorably, other than His own gracious choice. Romans 3:10-12 says, “There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one.”

U: Unconditional Election. In the words of Berkhof, election is “that eternal act of God whereby He, in His sovereign good pleasure, and on account of no foreseen merit in them, chooses a certain number of men to be the recipients of special grace and of eternal salvation.” (“Systematic Theology”). The Bible refers to saved people of the Church age as “the elect” twenty-five times. The word “elect” means “chosen.” This means that God chose us. I don’t believe the Bible teaches that God chooses us because of anything He sees in us (see Total Depravity). I believe Ephesians 1:4-5 when Paul says, “just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will.” That seems pretty clear that He chose certain people on purpose, and He did it before Adam was created.

Personally, I believe the story of the Great Flood is a good illustration of election. God told Noah in Genesis 6 to build an ark, gave the exact dimensions of the ark, and then said, “But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall enter the ark—you and your sons and your wife, and your sons’ wives with you.” That’s eight specific people, and nobody else. God never told Noah to invite anybody else on the ark, although I’m sure Noah, being a preacher of righteousness (2 Peter 2:5), warned the people of God’s impending wrath, but God never promised to save anybody other than Noah and his family. Interestingly, his father and grandfather were alive the whole time he was building the ark, and they both died the year of the flood. Whether they rejected God or not, they weren’t promised a spot on the ark.

I: Irresistible Grace. Basically this means that everybody God chose to be saved, will be saved. Just as He chose eight specific people to be saved from the Great Flood, and those exact people were saved, no more, no less. I believe that every single person God elects to salvation will be saved.

P: Perseverance of the Saints. I believe that if a person is elected by God to salvation, and therefore they come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, and are bound for heaven, that they cannot “lose” their salvation. Some would term this “Eternal Security” or “Once-Saved-Always-Saved.” I do NOT believe, as some have claimed Calvinists believe, that I am the one doing the Persevering or securing. I am sealed by the Spirit, and God is the one that keeps me saved, so to speak, not myself.

What it comes down to is that some people emphasize God’s sovereignty, that God is in charge of everything. Other people emphasize man’s free will, that men freely choose whether they will trust Christ or not. I believe both. I believe God is in control, and we have a responsibility to respond to His call to salvation. Believing both ideas is not impossible, because there are other doctrines equally difficult to understand, like the hypostatic union, the Trinity, and the kenosis.

I understand the beliefs of others who say that the Bible says “whosoever will may come”, but I don’t know how these people interpret passages like Ephesians 1:4-5, Ephesians 1:11, and Romans 8:29-30. The best explanation I ever heard was that when a believer enters heaven, there’s a sign on the outside of the gate that says “Whosoever will may come”, and when they pass through and look back, the inside of the gate says “Chosen before the foundation of the world.”

Did Noah and the other seven people in his family have to individually choose to obey God by building the ark and getting on board a week before the rain started? Yes. Did God predestine and choose those eight people to be saved from the flood? Yes. Do I understand how these two thoughts can be reconciled? No, but I believe them both.

So am I a Calvinist? I guess it depends on your definition. I trust the Lord Jesus Christ, and if I’m wrong on this doctrine, I’ll defer to His judgment.

Those of you who read my blog found out that in January I started shaving with a “old fashioned” razor, while I started using shaving soap and a brush.  If you missed that post, just scroll down to February 10th, and you’ll find it.

This is an update to that post.  In the original post, I stated that I could buy blades for $1.29 for five blades on Amazon, or I could go to my local store and buy them for $3.29.  Since then I have checked at other stores.  Neither my local Wal Mart nor my local Meijer carries double edged razor blades. At all.  I was able to find them at Marsh Supermarket (it’s like Hy Vee for you Iowa friends:  the expensive grocery store).   I also found them at CVS and Walgreens drug stores.  CVS had them for $6 for 10 blades, and Walgreens had them “on sale” for $7 for 10 blades.   Never mind.

I don’t know what the Arabic or other languages say, but who cares, right?

I went back to Amazon.com because my one blade that I started using last month is beginning to get a little dull.  I found a box of 100 double edged razor blades for $11.72, and I bought it.  Each blade should last me about a month (two weeks per side), so this box should last me until August of 2022, at an annual shaving cost of $1.40 plus whatever the shaving soap costs.  So I guess I won’t be able to go without shaving and use the excuse “I couldn’t afford to buy more razors.”