We have seen in the last post that the moral revolution does not have adequate footing on which to stand when it levels its moral charges. We have striven to reframe the debate so that it is no longer stacked against us. Yet embedded in the moral revolution is another contradiction which can be asked as a question: Who, or what, makes a person’s sexuality the way it is? Is it a result of human biology or is it a thing of one’s own determination? Continue reading Reframing the Debate, part 2
With surprising simplicity, the Christian position in favor of the natural family, binary gender roles, and traditional marriage can be reduced to scorn with the labels “hateful, intolerant, homophobic.” The Christian response to these charges has largely been to go on the defensive, endlessly apologizing for any supposed grievances or slip ups in tone or speech. Christians have become paralyzed by self-consciousness and (if we are honest) a silent shame for holding to doctrines which seem so offensive to a watching world. Continue reading Reframing the Debate
A conviction is not something you hold, but something that holds you. It is something outside of which one cannot operate safely or consistently. In the present time, however, conviction is not seen so much as a virtue but a vice. “Arrogant,” and “Narrow-minded,” are some of the labels given to people moved by such convictions. But nothing could be further from the truth.
It is true people of conviction speak with boldness, directness, candor and clarity. However, this bravery must not be confused with arrogance. It is not pretentiousness that moves these people but an absolute certainty that what they believe is true and that what is popularly believed is a lie. Continue reading Conviction or Narrow-mindedness?