This is from the BCC weekly update...
John Marcotte is a very sarcastic man.
Marcotte was an opponent of Proposition 8, the 2008 California ballot proposition that defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman. It passed and Marcotte was none too happy about it. Now he is working on getting an initiative of his own on the ballot in California next year.
His initiative is entitled the 2010 California Marriage Protection Act and it would effectively ban divorce in the state. One of the slogans of the campaign: “You said, ‘Til death do us part.’ You’re not dead yet.”
Here's a picture of a shirt for sale on his website http://rescuemarriage.org/.
Remember, Marcotte is being sarcastic—and cynical. He has no desire to really ban divorce. What he is trying to do is highlight what he perceives as the hypocrisy of those who supported the traditional definition of marriage. As he told the Associate Press, “Since California has decided to protect traditional marriage, I think it would be hypocritical of us not to sacrifice some of our own rights to protect traditional marriage even more.”
Two things struck me when I read about Marcotte’s efforts. First, I think he truly believes that those who supported Proposition 8 are mostly hypocrites. They say they one thing about having a high view of marriage but practice another. He is attempting to caricature the religious right as people who attempt to regulate the morality of others but fail to follow their own moral message. I pray that he is wrong.
Second, I was struck by what this proposition says about our culture. The fact that his proposition is considered so ludicrous is an ominous sign of our times. After all, no one could be serious about wanting to make divorce more difficult to achieve. In our culture, a marriage license carries no more weight than the paper on which it is written.
What should our response be as Christians? First, we must have compassion for those who have experienced the pain of divorce. Many in our church family and community have felt the pain of a marriage ripped apart. We must communicate to all our brothers and sisters in Christ that there is healing and restoration in Him.
Second, we must boldly proclaim the importance of covenant faithfulness in marriage. Let us be careful to affirm the truth of God’s Word in Genesis 2:18-15:
18 Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” 19 So out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him. 21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. 22 And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. 23 Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” 24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. 25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.
"Him we proclaim, warning everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone mature in Christ. For this I toil, struggling with all his energy that he powerfully works within me." Col 1:28-29
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
The Manhattan Declaration
Recently, the president of the seminary I attend sent out an email discussing why he signed a document entitled, "The Manhattan Declaration." I was unfamiliar with the document and so I read his blog post Why I Signed the Manhattan Declaration and checked out the document.
{UPDATE: One signer clarifies his position: Kevin DeYoung's blog, TeamPyro weigh in: Nineteen Questions }.
Dear Bethany Community,
I am passionately, unashamedly, and whole-heartedly pro-life. So, when someone suggested to me recently that I sign a document supporting the pro-life cause, I was prepared to do so.
As I reviewed the document, entitled “The Manhattan Declaration,” I found myself in hearty agreement with its three primary affirmations: the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife, and the rights of conscience and religious liberty.
Not only did I find myself in agreement with its general principles, I found that many evangelical leaders whom I highly esteem had already signed it, including men who have served or are serving as presidents at each of the three seminaries I have attended.
So why did I ultimately decide not to sign it?
The Manhattan Declaration does two things that I believe undermine the gospel. First, it refers to the gospel without ever defining what it is. The reader is left to define it however he or she may choose. Second, and related, it asserts unity in Christ among the signers of the document even though some of the primary signers of the document would reject the basic truth of the gospel that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone apart from our own works.
For example, it states: "It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season. May God help us not to fail in that duty.” It also uses phrases such as “we Christians,” “we believers,” and “as followers of Jesus Christ” to describe the people signing the document.
But I do not have such unity with all the signers of this document, nor is the basis of unity—the gospel of Jesus Christ—defined. While I will pursue unity with the signers in fighting for the causes enumerated, we do not have unity in Christ simply because we both use the word “Christian.” We believe radically different things concerning how a person comes to faith in Christ.
My personal conviction is that by signing this document, I would be implying that we have unity on the most important issue in the universe—an issue in which we stand on different sides of an immense chasm.
If the document had merely advocated political positions, I would have had no problem signing it. I need not agree with others on theological issues to work toward political ends. But the document made theological assertions. It therefore crosses the line from being a political document—which I could support as a Christian—to making a theological statement about the nature of the gospel that I cannot support.
How important is the gospel?
It is more important than ending abortion. It is more important than preserving a traditional understanding of marriage. Yes, it is even more important than our own lives, brothers and sisters.
No one will ever come to Christ by simply opposing abortion. No legislation defining marriage will transform a child of wrath into a child of God.
May God end abortion in our land and may He give us the grace to work with individuals from all different creeds and religions in the political process. I strive for that and pray you do as well. May God preserve us from the unraveling of traditional marriage in our culture and may He give us the joy of working with those from different faiths toward that end.
But even more importantly, May God give us the ability to boldly proclaim the Good News of His Son Jesus Christ, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved!
By His Grace,
Pastor Daniel
Monday, November 30, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Bethany Community Update Email
In 3rd grade, I memorized Psalm 100 and can still remember the thrill of being able to say that I had memorized a whole chapter of the Bible!
Whitney went to a Be Moms event recently and was encouraged by Laurie Jenkin’s story of teaching her boys Psalm 100 last year. So, the Bennett family is trying to memorize Psalm 100 and plan on saying it together as a family on Thanksgiving.
Psalm 100 (ESV)
1 Make a joyful noise to the Lord, all the earth!
2 Serve the Lord with gladness! Come into his presence with singing!
3 Know that the Lord, he is God! It is he who made us, and we are his; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.
4 Enter his gates with thanksgiving, and his courts with praise! Give thanks to him; bless his name!
5 For the Lord is good; his steadfast love endures forever, and his faithfulness to all generations.
Perhaps you might wish to read this on Thanksgiving as well as you contemplate the glory of the God from whom all good things flow.
I am thankful for this church. Thank you for letting me serve as a pastor at this church with such joy.
Whitney went to a Be Moms event recently and was encouraged by Laurie Jenkin’s story of teaching her boys Psalm 100 last year. So, the Bennett family is trying to memorize Psalm 100 and plan on saying it together as a family on Thanksgiving.
Psalm 100 (ESV)
1 Make a joyful noise to the Lord, all the earth!
2 Serve the Lord with gladness! Come into his presence with singing!
3 Know that the Lord, he is God! It is he who made us, and we are his; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.
4 Enter his gates with thanksgiving, and his courts with praise! Give thanks to him; bless his name!
5 For the Lord is good; his steadfast love endures forever, and his faithfulness to all generations.
Perhaps you might wish to read this on Thanksgiving as well as you contemplate the glory of the God from whom all good things flow.
I am thankful for this church. Thank you for letting me serve as a pastor at this church with such joy.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Biblical Literacy
This story from USA Today on biblical literacy was sent to me by my friend Andrew. The basic point of the story is that biblical literacy is important, but schools are afraid to teach the Bible because we crazy Christians will use the book to proseltyze. Here is an excerpt:
Indeed, Newman says that trying to appreciate biblical allusions in literature without an underlying knowledge of Scripture is like trying to appreciate a good joke when someone has to explain the punch line. You might eventually "get" the joke, she says, but by the time you do, "it's not funny anymore."
Interestingly, a 2008 study published in Sociological Quarterly found that regular church attendance positively affected students' grade point averages. And while lead researcher Jennifer Glanville of the University of Iowa attributed much of this effect to the social and psychological benefits of being enmeshed in a wider community of like-minded peers and adults, some of this effect might also be explained by the greater biblical literacy young people typically acquire by attending church.
To stem the decline of biblical literacy, three states — Georgia, Texas and Tennessee — have passed laws in recent years calling for public high schools to offer elective courses that teach the Bible "in an objective and non-devotional manner with no attempt to indoctrinate students" (as Georgia's law puts it).
A few thoughts...
1. It is always astounding to me to realize what an impact the Bible has had upon our culture...and how quickly our culture is changing. A significantly smaller fraction of our cultural output requires Biblical literacy in order to interpret.
2. Yeah, I have to admit if I were a teacher I would do use the Bible to teach about Christianity. Guilty.
3. It is always sad to see how fearful secularists are of proselytizing, or even the acknowledgement of religious belief in the public sphere. The objective is not protection of all beliefs (or lack thereof) but rather the removal of the acceptability of belief.
4. Would a teacher who doesn't believe the Bible to be true be held to the same standard of "objectivity?" Would he be required to NOT communicate his lack of belief? In other words, if a teacher taught about the life of Christ from the Gospels and considered those accounts to be mythical, would we be concerned about her communicating that to her class? If she mentioned that they were fanciful accounts, would we accuse her of proselytizing? I think the whole idea of objectivity is rather absurd.
Indeed, Newman says that trying to appreciate biblical allusions in literature without an underlying knowledge of Scripture is like trying to appreciate a good joke when someone has to explain the punch line. You might eventually "get" the joke, she says, but by the time you do, "it's not funny anymore."
Interestingly, a 2008 study published in Sociological Quarterly found that regular church attendance positively affected students' grade point averages. And while lead researcher Jennifer Glanville of the University of Iowa attributed much of this effect to the social and psychological benefits of being enmeshed in a wider community of like-minded peers and adults, some of this effect might also be explained by the greater biblical literacy young people typically acquire by attending church.
To stem the decline of biblical literacy, three states — Georgia, Texas and Tennessee — have passed laws in recent years calling for public high schools to offer elective courses that teach the Bible "in an objective and non-devotional manner with no attempt to indoctrinate students" (as Georgia's law puts it).
A few thoughts...
1. It is always astounding to me to realize what an impact the Bible has had upon our culture...and how quickly our culture is changing. A significantly smaller fraction of our cultural output requires Biblical literacy in order to interpret.
2. Yeah, I have to admit if I were a teacher I would do use the Bible to teach about Christianity. Guilty.
3. It is always sad to see how fearful secularists are of proselytizing, or even the acknowledgement of religious belief in the public sphere. The objective is not protection of all beliefs (or lack thereof) but rather the removal of the acceptability of belief.
4. Would a teacher who doesn't believe the Bible to be true be held to the same standard of "objectivity?" Would he be required to NOT communicate his lack of belief? In other words, if a teacher taught about the life of Christ from the Gospels and considered those accounts to be mythical, would we be concerned about her communicating that to her class? If she mentioned that they were fanciful accounts, would we accuse her of proselytizing? I think the whole idea of objectivity is rather absurd.
Labels:
Biblical literacy,
pumpkins,
religion in schools
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

