Conor Friedersdorf does not agree with Christian views on sexuality. He doesn’t think homosexuality or premarital sex is a sin. He supports legal gay marriage. Nevertheless, he believes it is wrong to accuse Christian business owners of being bigots for refusing to participate in gay weddings. He also defends Ross Douthat against such ugly accusations. Writing for The Atlantic, Friedersdorf argues that “Refusing to Photograph a Gay Wedding Isn’t Hateful.”
Egalitarians often claim that gender roles are a result of the Fall of man into sin. They might agree that the husband appears to be the “head” of the wife in some biblical texts but that those texts are reflecting an imperfect situation. Male leadership in marriage is not rooted in the order of God’s good creation but in sinful human pride. For example, Rachel Held Evans has written,
In the biblical narrative, hierarchy enters human relationships as part of the curse, and begins with man’s oppression of women—’your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you’ (Genesis 3:16). But with Christ, hierarchical relationships are exposed for the sham that they are… (A Year of Biblical Womanhood., p. 219) Continue Reading →
Did you know that it is possible to purchase Facebook likes? There’s a legal way and an illegal way to do this, but it turns out that neither of them actually help generate real interest in your site. The video above is very illuminating. The interwebs are filled with chicanery.
Ross Douthat has penned what I believe to be the most insightful analysis of what has happened in our country over the last week. He correctly observes that the debate over gay marriage in our country is all but over. Despite some regional holdouts, majority public opinion has moved in favor of recognizing gay marriage. And it’s only a matter of time before a majority of the holdouts—primarily in the South—move that way as well. The Supreme Court’s Windsor decision last summer ensures that legal gay marriage in all fifty states is a fait accompli at this point. Continue Reading →
Andrew Sullivan strikes a sympathetic pose toward Christians in his “The Morning After In Arizona.” There are some things in here that I genuinely appreciate, but those items are counterbalanced by some pretty awful aspersions towards Christians. Here he is in his own words. Continue Reading →
The media’s reporting on the Arizona bill regarding religious freedom has been nothing short of Orwellian. As I wrote yesterday, the debate about the bill has been far more depressing than the actual defeat of the bill. Why? Because nearly every media outlet reporting on the bill has been propagating an erroneous group-think. They described the bill by turns as an attempt to enact Jim Crow style discrimination against gay people. The reporting has been biased and in some cases straightforwardly wrong on the facts. Continue Reading →
All eyes were on Arizona this week to see if Gov. Jan Brewer would sign or veto a controversial bill relating to religious liberty. Supporters of the bill had hoped that it would have given legal recourse to Christians (and others) who decline to participate in gay wedding celebrations. Opponents of the bill painted it as the resurrection of Jim Crow and as a cynical attempt to enact legal discrimination against gay people. Continue Reading →
Last week, Kirsten Powers and Jonathan Merritt joined their voices with the opponents of Christianity. In short, they argue that Christian business owners who refuse to participate in gay weddings are unjustly discriminating against gay people. Powers even went so far as to say that legal efforts to protect these Christians are tantamount to Jim Crow laws for gay people. Again today, Powers has another op-ed doubling down on her stance against these Christians. Continue Reading →
I’ve been reading Dave Brunn’s stimulating book One Bible, Many Versions—a work discussing the translation philosophy of various English Bible versions. This is a fine book in many ways. It engages an old controversy with an irenic tone. But if the book does anything, it shows that there is some confusion among evangelicals about what Formal Equivalence (FE) translators are aiming to do in their work. Brunn’s book shows that all translations—including FE translations like the NASB and the ESV—resort to Dynamic Equivalence (DE). His point is that not even FE translations practice their theory consistently, and he illustrates this fact with voluminous examples. Continue Reading →
Kirsten Powers and Jonathan Merritt are doubling down on their argument that Christian business owners are morally wrong when they refuse to participate in same-sex wedding celebrations. In a co-written essay for The Daily Beast, they argue that Christian business owners are morally and legally obliged to participate in gay wedding ceremonies with their goods and services. Not to participate is tantamount to the kind of discrimination that whites in this country used to exhibit against blacks.
Let me just say first of all that I am grieved by this article. Not merely because it is a moral and constitutional mess, but also because of who has written it. Do Powers and Merritt realize that they ratify the arguments of Christianity’s fiercest opponents when they attribute our conscientious objections to animus and bigotry? There is a larger context here. The sexual revolutionaries have done a fine job over the last decade of demonizing Christians as purveyors of hate because of our commitment to what the Bible teaches about sex. Powers and Merritt are joining their voices with our opponents when they militate against conscience rights for Christians. And this all by itself grieves me. I would have hoped for more from them.