Ask Pastor Matt: Should I Invite My Gay Friend?

Pastor Matt, 

I have a good friend at work who is a professing homosexual. Since our relationship as friends and coworkers is growing, I have considered inviting her to important events in our lives (weddings, the birth of children, baptisms etc.). I don't want to promote a sinful lifestyle, but I do want to be a good witness of the love of Christ. Where should a Christian draw the line on these matters? I'm looking for ways to share my faith in Christ with her, but I'm not sure how. Can you help? 

--Anonymous 

What a great question! And one that no doubt many believers are asking, especially as our society grows more and more accepting of the so-called alternative lifestyles. 

Although some Christians may disagree with me on this, I do believe that you should invite this woman who is struggling with her sexual identity to come to witness your family together in important events like weddings, the birth of a child, Christian baptisms, and other great life moments.

I see no reason why not to invite her, as your friendship with her seems to be blooming anyway. If anything, I believe it would be a positive witness to her of the beauty and glory of a Christian marriage, conception within marriage, the miracle of live birth, and the discipleship of child rearing--all for the glory of Jesus. We want people in alternative lifestyles to see up-close and personal the stability and beauty of married life, don't we? We especially want them to see Christian households that live together in peace within the covenant of grace. 

As a matter of fact, I love preaching at weddings and funerals--not to mention baptisms--because these are some of the important Christian life markers that unbelievers still feel some compunction to attend and participate in. Preaching at these events is a great joy for me because I know there will be those who are unbelievers present. I want them to see what we do. Hear what we believe. Even long for what we have in Christ. 

We want LGBT people to be able to see us as Christians in our "real element" with our families and our churches, standing alongside our spouses, loving and raising our children together in the faith. Too often LGBT people  have mental conceptions of Christians holding up signs at street rallies and shouting out our beliefs in megaphones. You know and I know that Christians are loving people, even if we do have many flaws that our Savior did not have. But they have often been fed an 'image' of Christianity that is no more than an angry caricature. 

Part of our problem as believers today is we lack the necessary "street credibility" with the LGBT community who only view us as condescending, hypocritical, and judgmental. The only way to refute and break down that stereotype is to engage in real relationships and honest friendships. This will take time and cannot be done overnight. 

If we are going to be a witness to people in the LGBT community, we are going to have to develop authentic relationships with them. We will need to invite them into our homes and dine with them. Serve them meals and love them through their own struggles and trials. Handing them tracts on a street-corner won't likely be enough for them to listen intently to the message we proclaim. They have been trained to shut it out. If we are going to share authentic relationships with LGBT people, that will require us to invite them into deeper moments of our lives beyond professionalism and mere neighborliness (although it often starts there). We will have to go deeper.
Wait longer. Love more compassionately. We have a huge up-hill climb to go. 

The moment will come when you can talk to her about your faith in Christ. Pray for that to come in God's timing. Ask God for His wisdom in discerning when that moment will be. It may not be "the big conversation" but many little conversations over many weeks and months. Or it may all pour out over a very long extended coffee one day at Starbucks. (Pay the bill and give a generous tip too--act like a Christian!).

By all means, include this women in the meaningful moments of your life and show her the love of Christ who Himself met with drunks, liars, thieves, religious hypocrites, adulterers--and loved them all. At the same time, Jesus masterfully defended the law of the Old Testament and gave no ground on moral issues. Neither should we. When the moment comes for you to share your faith--and possibly even defend the line in the sand you draw about human sexuality--you will have earned the right to speak truth into her life rather than assuming it.  

Hope that helps. 

Matthew Everhard is the Senior Pastor of Faith Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Brooksville, Florida. 

The Most Dangerous Book in America: It's Not What You Might Think

The Aquila Report recently shared the incredible story of a seminary professor at a liberal theological institution who was fired for merely being in the same room when a student was given a particular book. The fact that the professor, Jamal-Dominique Hopkins, allowed the book in his classroom--and did nothing to stop it's contents from actually being read--showed tacit approval of the book's contents, the "powers that be" determined.

So they axed him. Fired him. Cut him. Terminated him.

Hopkins did not give the student the book. He didn't teach from it. He just allowed the book to be present in the liberal-leaning Interdenominational Theological Center (Atlanta).  Apparently administration would have had him to burn it on the spot.

What kind of a book could be so dangerous that its mere presence in an academic classroom would warrant a professor's termination? A book about bomb-making perhaps? Maybe a maniacal manifesto to wreak violence on campus? Child pornography?

No.

The book was Robert A.J. Gagnon's scholarly work, The Bible and Homosexual Practice.

Conservative scholars deem this academic work to be the definitive book on the topic of the Old and New Testament's treatment of homosexual behavior. In the book, Gagnon, a professor at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, argues from a historical, linguistic, textual, and hermeneutical basis that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament agree that homosexuality is out of step with the complimentary design of the two human genders (male and female) and is therefore sinful.

Therein lies the great unacceptable offense: a scholar (Gagnon) has concluded--on the evidence of a plethora of Biblical research--that homosexuality is a sin.

(Also on this topic: The Bible, Homosexuality, and Shellfish). 

For many, the book may actually be a rather boring treatise. It is a technical work on the usage of ancient Greek and Hebrew words, interpretive methodology, and contextual issues in Romans 1 and other passages.

But it is the conclusion of this academic work that is so unacceptable: Gagnon concludes that homosexuality is forbidden as a sin, as a simple reading of the relevant Scriptural texts that he exegetes make clear enough.

It cost Hopkins his job for allowing this book to exist in his classroom. Apparently he should have cut it up on the spot or put it through the shredder.

And soon enough, this kind of view-point discrimination might cost you yours.

Matthew Everhard is the Senior Pastor of Faith Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Brooksville, Florida. Please consider following on Twitter @matt_everhard

Why We Wrote What We Wrote: The Brooksville Statement on Marriage

 By Matthew Everhard.

Martin Luther once wrote that if we are not defending the gospel at the very point that it is being attacked in our own generation, we are not defending it at all. It is for this reason that our 380-member church in the small, rural town of Brooksville, Florida decided to act.

While we are immensely proud of a recent chicken-sandwich chain whose founder boldly stated his convictions regarding traditional marriage, the elders of Faith Evangelical Presbyterian Church feel that it is primarily the church’s calling  to defend biblical orthodoxy. Our elders and I could not stand idly by while an attack on marriage—a thinly veiled attack on the creation order and the Creator—rages before our very eyes. 

The Brooksville Statement on Marriage is a 600-word declaration of conscience that attempts to do three things. (1) First, we hope to clearly define marriage in a generation in which the word “marriage” itself has lost all semblance of meaning. (2) Second, we hoped to positively state our convictions regarding the delineations of human sexuality, rather than make a polemical attack on those lifestyles with which we ardently disagree. (3) Third, we hoped to speak a timely word of compassion and grace in a world of “bumper sticker” one-liners and alleged hate-speech.  

Our hope is that this small town church declaration would inspire like-minded evangelical churches across the globe to adopt this (or a similar) statement, in order to provide a desperately needed prophetic voice in veritable wilderness of confusion. 

[Go to the official website here].

The Brooksville Statement on Marriage

Definition

Marriage is beautiful because God is glorious. God, in His infinite Trinitarian wisdom, created and ordained marriage to display the mysterious union of Christ and His Church (Ephesians 5:22-25). As the creator and author of marriage, God alone has the authority to define it. This He did in the second chapter of Genesis where God, having created both groom and bride, brought them together personally (2:22) and a benediction was pronounced over the couple;  “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife and they shall become one flesh” (2:24, ESV). For this reason, Christian believers do now hold—and have always held—that marriage is between one man and one woman; that it is sealed by the exchange of covenant vows; and that it is intended for the whole of natural life, until death.

On the Interpretation of Scripture

We Christian believers regard the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the inspired, inerrant, and infallible authority under which we live. We regard the clarity of Scripture to be sufficient for us to interpret the Bible accurately on matters of both faith and practice, using straightforward grammatical and historical principles. For this reason, we reject all attempts to obscure or “reread” Biblical passages which abundantly state the parameters of human sexuality. Sexual relations are to be enjoyed as a gift, and exclusively, between a married man and his own wife alone (Exodus 20:14; Hebrews 13:4). Any alternate readings of Scripture that intentionally or unintentionally obscure this foundational Biblical presupposition are to be rejected.

On Sin and Grace                                              

While it is true that Christians are called to hate transgression and iniquity, we find the sin within our own hearts—and not the sin of our neighbors—to be the most egregious of all. We lament and repent of our own sin first; be it in thought, word, or deed. We welcome those of all races, genders, ethnicities, and sexual inclinations to repent and believe in Jesus Christ and to worship in our churches. We sympathize with all who struggle in temptation, and exhort them to pursue “the obedience of faith” and embrace the new life given to the Redeemed by the Holy Spirit. Accordingly, we continue to reject any and every sin that degrades God’s glorious creation of marriage, including: adultery, fornication, rape, incest, homosexuality, polygamy, lust, pornography, coercive abstinence while in the state of marriage, and all forms of emotional, physical, and sexual abuse. Christians are called to love—and not hate—our enemies and those who persecute us (Matt 5:44). Thus, we utterly disregard any attempt to mischaracterize our convictions on the above matters as “hate speech,” for to tell the truth on these matters is indeed a most loving and gracious act. 

On Human Laws and Ordinances

Moreover, mankind can pass no law that redefines marriage any more than mortal man can pass a law that declares the light of the sun to be dark, or the gravity of the earth to be ceased. Though various laws may be passed by the agency of human pen and ink; or judgments rendered from human courts (higher or lower); yet human beings have not the prerogative, now or ever, to alter, change, or redefine marriage.

On Civil Disobedience

Finally, then, we the undersigned stand firm in our convictions on these matters and refuse to take any such actions as would compel us to violate either Scripture or conscience--even if so compelled by civil law--for “to go against conscience is neither right nor safe.” Amen.

Teaching Elders: Rev. Matthew Everhard. Rev. David Franklin. Ruling Elders: David Peeler. David Field, Scott Knight, Doug Dempsey, Gwynn Blair, and Dr. George Boring (clerk). 

Become a signer of the Brooksville Statement on Marriage by "liking" our Facebook page. 

Fried Chicken and Traditional Marriage?

I love Chick Fil A.

To be honest, the reasons I enjoy eating there have nothing to do with the personal views of their CEO or any management staff. I love Chick Fil A because I love their chicken and they have great service. But unless you've been hiding under a rock somewhere, you've heard almost every politico or cultural commentator  celebrating or snubbing the recent comments by CEO Dan Cathy that he supports marriage as between one man and one woman.

The Mayors of Chicago and Boston have reacted and promised to keep this business from opening in their city because of the personal views of their CEO. Of course I am biased (everyone is!) , but if you take a step back and consider  the reality of a government official promising to regulate commerce because of one person's  personal views , it is revealing and striking to say the least. The Jim Henson Company has notified Chick Fil A that it will no longer partner with them on future projects. Facebook had a "snafu" when Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee invited hundreds of thousands of subscribers to Chick Fil A appreciation day, and the invitation mysteriously disappeared for hours. Needless to say, this topic has exploded and generated strong opinions and comments on both sides.

As a minister I am both encouraged and convicted. I am encouraged anytime someone in our culture who is a leader in their community, or contributes in a sphere of influence, stands up for biblical values. But I am also convicted that as a culture, we exist in such an environment where behavior can become so normalized that to question it is to invite a firestorm.

While affirming my commitment that the practice of homosexuality is sin, nonetheless I can't help feel  the church has failed in reaching out to those in the homosexual community. Heterosexual sex outside of marriage is just as sinful, and yet our Christian sub-culture makes allowances for certain taboos and respectable sins (If you haven't read Jerry Bridges' "Respectable Sins" first repent, then go read it :) We in the church need to speak the truth in love, and unfortunately we have proven the culture right at times when they have claimed that those in the conservative Christian world (of which I am an unashamed member) are bigoted or hateful. We need to repent, just as we are calling homosexuals to repent and those who support "gay marriage" to repent. Homosexuals don't need to "get straight"...they need Jesus, just like you and I do. And once we are transformed, our desires and affections are changed that we want to live in the sweet spot of life; loving and delighting in the law of God.

(For more on this topic, click here to read "The Bible, Homosexuality, and Shellfish") 

The Apostle Paul (inspired by the Holy Spirit)  sums up the problem with his usual poise and grace when he wrote to the Corinthians, "For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." (1 Corinthians 1:18) Let us never forget, that our only banner is the crucified and risen Christ;  not any enterprise or fast food chain (as tasty as it may be). We should not be surprised when the world rejects our message, for it is folly to a self-centered and individualistic culture. Yet it is nothing less than the very power of God to those who are refined and refreshed by its healing grace. So on August 1, if you want to eat at Chick Fil A to support their CEO, by all means go ahead! But don't forget, that taking a stand for Christ involves daily dying to our own agendas, and remembering that our life is hidden with Him (Colossians 3:3)

It has been said that some things are as American as Apple Pie and Baseball. Maybe we our entering an era (good and bad)  where something is as traditional as fried chicken and marriage.

Lee Hutchings is an Assistant Pastor at Highlands Presbyterian Church in Ridgeland, Mississippi

The Bible, Homosexuality, and Shellfish

By Matthew Everhard 

When President Barack Obama recently endorsed gay marriage this month, an “evolution” of his previous position, the focus of many Americans was again turned to our real national pastime, human sexuality. (No it is not baseball anymore!) More aggressive than in recent months, it seems that many columnists, pundits, and amateur liberal theologians have been discussing--and even mocking--the Bible’s perspective on this controversial matter. 

One of the more common assaults against the conservative “one man, one woman” definition of marriage is to make the Biblical position affirmed in our Scriptures to appear outlandish, strange, and untenable to modern minds. The strategy to make the traditional view of marriage seem obsolete runs as follows (with some slight variations): Yes, the Bible technically forbids the practice of homosexuality in Leviticus 18:22, but it also forbids eating shellfish (Leviticus 11:9-11), and commends the stoning of blasphemers (Leviticus 24:16). Since the latter two are ridiculous, so is the former. This argument would appear credible, if it weren’t such terrible exegesis of the book of Leviticus. 

It is ironic that those arguing such a progressive position would choose these three elements of Levitical law as examples of their “ridiculous by association,” argument. As you will see, these given examples perfectly illustrate the three distinct strands of laws given by God in the Old Testament. 

A redemptive-historical approach to Biblical interpretation demands that we interpret passages of the Bible with their historical context--as regards God’s saving acts of redemption--in full view. During the giving of the Mosaic Law at the covenant of Sinai, God imposed three types of laws upon Israel: (1) First, God imposed moral laws that are binding and timeless. These relate to holiness, ethical purity, and the natural law written on the hearts of men. Absolute in their application, violations of moral law are always sinful. (2) Second, God imposed ceremonial laws given to distinguish national Israel (the people of the covenant) from their unsanctified neighbors. These dietary and cultural restrictions, along with tabernacle/temple sacrificial regulations, were intended to make clear the distinction between God’s people and the surrounding pagan nations. (3) Third, God mandated civil laws imposed upon Israel as a nation-state, much the same as we have federal law here in the U.S. today. These laws pertained to the application and enforcement of the Sinaitic code, with particular reference to Israel as national government.  As long as national Israel existed by standing in the Sinai covenant with God, all three types of laws (moral, ceremonial, and civil) governed the hearts and lives of the people. 

Nevertheless, the Mosaic/Sinai covenant was a conditional covenant, contingent on national Israel’s fidelity with Jehovah God as Lord (Deut 28). Two events radically changed the standing of Israel forever. First, the nation of Israel abdicated its role as the divine representative to the pagan nations by her overt and incessant covenant infidelity. This persistent covenant infidelity ultimately resulted in the Northern Kingdom being destroyed by the Assyrian in 722BC and the Southern Kingdom being sent into exile in Babylon, culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem in 586BC. (This is the dire message of Isaiah, Jeremiah and most of the OT the prophets). Israel, as a nation-state, ordained by God as a chosen people, ceased to exist. The civil law was neither possible nor necessary to enforce. 

Click here to read "Fried Chicken and Traditional Marriage?" by Lee Hutchings.

The other major event is of course the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, the pinnacle event of all of redemption history. By dying a sacrificial death for the sin of His people, Christ fulfilled the ceremonial laws in a way that National Israel never could. His perfect obedience and complete fidelity to God fulfilled and abrogated the ceremonial law. Because of His atoning death, no sacrifice and tabernacle/temple offerings are any longer required. We no longer need to offer bulls, goats, or sheep. (This is the whole point of the book of Hebrews). Moreover, Christ fulfilled and abrogated all civil and ceremonial laws initiating a new Kingdom that transcends national Israel in every way. 

At this point, I hope interpreting Leviticus on the other side of the cross and empty tomb is becoming easier. Laws prohibiting shellfish (ceremonial law) and mandating the stoning blasphemers (civil law) seem outmoded and ancient because they are. Christ has come. Christ has died. Christ is raised again. We live on the near side of the cross. 

The moral law (summarized by the Ten Commandments), however, is the timeless law of God revealed in the Sinai covenant for which mankind is still responsible. These are the inviolable moral laws written indelibly on the consciences of all mankind (Romans 2:15), and the standards by which human kind will all be judged. Murder, lying, idolatry and theft will always be sinful no matter where or when they are committed. As homosexuality is a gross violation of the creation order in general (Genesis 2:18-24), and the seventh commandment in particular (Exodus 20:14; Deuteronomy 5:18), the fact that this practice transgresses God’s standards of purity is beyond dispute. This is why the New Testament agrees with and reinforces the Old Testament’s prohibitions of this practice (Romans 1:26-27; Colossians 3:5; 1 Corinthians 6:9; 1 Timothy 1:10). 

Simply stated, the “homosexuality and shellfish” argument falls apart entirely when read as the Scriptures are meant to be read—with a redemptive-historical approach in view. 

Matthew Everhard is the Senior Pastor of Faith Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Brooksville, Florida. Follow him on Twitter @matt_everhard