Voddie Baucham on Homosexuality

good afternoon in addressing this issue of homosexuality there are a number of things for us to look at and what I want us to do in this session is I want us to examine the arguments that people make in support of this practice and in particular the arguments people make in support of Christians lowering their defenses and being open to same-sex marriage there are a number of arguments being used out there I'll refer to the most popular ones and then there's one in particular that we'll spend our time with here in this session argument number one is the argument that Jesus never addressed homosexuality this is a very popular approach people will look at this and uh say well you're a Christian which means you're a follower of Christ right well yeah I'm a follower of Christ well as a follower of Christ it seems very strange to me that you're making a big deal out of something that Jesus never mentioned one time in the Gospels not one time and for most Christians they hear that and we're just sort of taken aback and you know our response is usually something along the lines of work so you well was was it's bad we don't we don't what and we just don't know what to say right um well here's what you say number one Jesus did address on the sexuality he addressed it in Matthew chapter five and in Matthew chapter 19 because in Matthew chapter five in Matthew chapter 19 he addressed the issue of marriage he rooted his understanding of marriage and the teaching in Genesis chapter two the teaching in Genesis chapter two that gave us marriage between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation illustration and sanctification he also made it very clear that what man is joined together what God has joined together man cannot separate in other words God is the author of marriage not man therefore God is the one who defines marriage not man therefore man does not have the right to introduce the concept of same-sex marriage number one because by definition it's not marriage it's another thing and number two because by definition it goes against what was created in Genesis chapter two so Jesus did address homosexuality but there's a bigger issue here Jesus is a member of the Godhead you see we believe with the one God who has existed eternally in three persons the Father the Son the Holy Spirit you cannot separate Jesus from the father and the spirit on the issue of homosexuality Jesus was there in Sodom and Gomorrah he was raining down fire and brimstone Jesus is the author of Leviticus so you mean that Jesus never addressed the issue of homosexuality unless you're going to argue that Jesus a different opinion on the issue than the father and the spirit this is hugely problematic because that would mean a breach in the Trinity and the whole universe would cave in on itself thirdly the Bible is one story not many you can know long you didn't know more separate Jesus from Paul or Peter then you could separate Jesus from the father or the Spirit the Bible is one story not many what did the Apostles teach the Apostles are whose apostles they are Christ's apostles so the teaching that they give us is the authoritative teaching of the church from the Lord Jesus Christ himself so again for these three reasons we don't have to panic when someone says well well Jesus never addressed the issue of homosexuality because here's another thing Jesus never addressed the issue of pedophilia either so now we can point out to the person first of all you're wrong because he did address it in Matthew 5 and Matthew 19 second of all Jesus is a member of the Godhead you can't separate the father from the son of the Spirit thirdly the Bible is one story not many you can't separate the teaching of Jesus from the teaching of his apostles and finally if you take that line of argumentation you would have to eventually be okay with pedophilia because Jesus never said anything about that so can we dispense with that one okay second argument that people use is the argument that basically says and and this is probably the most popular argument today because of a book by that by a guy by the name of Matthew vines called God and the gay Christian and this is a book that's popular among young Christians because Matthew vines identifies himself as reformed evangelical and inerrant issed he holds a high view of Scripture very careful exegesis and homosexual and supports monogamous same-sex relationships and his argument basically is that the writers of the Bible were addressing something other than what we know as same-sex orientation they were addressing a practice called pederasty which was a cultural practice whereby men particularly who were heterosexual they they weren't homosexual they didn't have a homosexual sexual orientation they were heterosexual men they had wives but there were practices within the culture were they used boys for sex and what Paul was basically saying was how dare you heterosexual men engage in this practice that should only be engaged in by people who have an actual orientation toward homosexuality well there are number of problems with this line of argumentation number one Matthew vines ignores ancient literature that will made it clear that Paul about the same line of argumentation that Matthew vines is using this idea of sexual orientation is not a new idea the second problem with that is this Matthew finds offers absolutely zero evidence that there is such thing as a homosexual orientation to say something they may be surprising to you I don't automatically agree with people when they say that they're homosexual because there is no evidence that there is such a thing there's evidence that there are people who engage in the practice of what the Bible calls sodomy but there is no evidence that there are people who have a permanent orientation toward homosexuality in fact there's two thousand-year-old evidence and you'll hear about it tomorrow that there are people who practice homosexuality who call themselves homosexuals who according to 1st Corinthians chapter 6 were not that any more which means that being homosexual is not the same thing as being black or being white or being whatever it's not the same thing it's not an immutable characteristic and nobody has proven otherwise there is zo0 biological evidence that there's an immutable characteristic if there was biological evidence that you could prove that somebody was homosexual after they died all you have to do is do an autopsy you just do a post-mortem go into the brain and find that area in the brain that homosexuals have well wait but nothing in the brain okay we'll go into the genes and find the gene - wait I think that's nothing in the genes well I heard about a pheromone study you're going to the Fairmont oh really that was not huh there's absolutely nothing nothing that proves that there is such a thing as a person who is a homosexual there are people who practice homosexuality but there is nothing in the world nothing that demonstrates that there is a class or category of people who are immutably and unchangeably homosexuals just like i'm immutably an unfeasibly a black person it doesn't exist although the majority of you out there believe that it does because you've been told over and over and over and over again you hear so many stories I've known all my life I knew it when I was a boy I knew it when I was a little girl no you didn't you weren't even you didn't even have sexual thoughts of those kind when you were a little boy or a little girl you didn't even develop sexually back then how could you possibly have known about your sexual orientation that's a ridiculous lie and we let people get away with it all the time all the time you shouldn't you shouldn't the other problem with this line of argumentation of course is that Paul in Romans chapter 1 also addresses women who engage in unnatural practices with other women so if all Paul was dealing with lives of the practice of pederasty in the pagan greco-roman world where men used boys for sex then placed somebody tell me why he also addressed women who engaged in that practice with other when that wasn't the same as pederasty in the greco-roman world hmm see Matthew vines is just hoping that we just sort of look over that you know he brings up some some ancient you know Greek literature you know they use dis things that and we're supposed to go wow I didn't know that maybe that was what Paul was it no fraid not fraid not it's not the only literature in existence Paul wouldn't have been ignorant of what Matthew vines is talking about and that doesn't address the issue of the women is the other problem if we make the argument that this practice is acceptable because of an orientation then what do we do with the pedophile who says this is my orientation I've known it forever I as an adult man and oriented toward young boys or oriented toward young girls it's just my orientation and since it's my orientation and we're accepting orientations then you have to accept that one or what if I'm just oriented toward violence violence toward women I beat my wife you get upset with me and I say oh oh oh whoa this is my orientation I've known since I a little boy that I was oriented toward violence and particularly against females so how can you judge me for this violence against my wife when obviously it's my orientation II promiscuity went around with all different kinds of women hey it's my orientation I've known it for a long time so now all of a sudden if we accept math Matthew vines argument there are a whole lot of other things where we have to say okay it's a sin unless of course you feel deeply because remember there's no biological evidence whatsoever right it's a sin unless you feel deeply that you're oriented in this way and of course if you feel deeply that you're oriented in this way then all bets are off you don't have to pay attention to what the Bible says in regards to sexual sin do you see how complicated this becomes by the way even if we do ever have biological evidence that doesn't change things why well if we find a gay gene when we say well well here okay now this person has it's genetically we know that this person is predisposed to homosexuality okay so it's not a sin anymore whew oh so if I'm genetically predisposed to alcoholism by the way there's more evidence for that I'm genetically predisposed to alcoholism I get a pass y'all cuz I have a genetic predisposition therefore it's not sin I'm genetically predisposed to be violent particularly against women I get a pass do you follow okay so this is the problem with the the Matthew vines line of argumentation but know this this is absolutely it's itchy it's just run amuck among young Christians in the Western world just it's it's everywhere okay it's a it's a very appealing and compelling approach and he really does present himself as someone who takes the Scriptures seriously he's presenting this evidence you know and he goes on to say there's six passages of Scripture there's the first red flag you want to deal with homosexuality homosexuality in the Bible there's only six passages in the scripture that deal with homosexuality in the Bible asked a lie from the pit of hell every passage of Scripture that deals with marriage sexuality they every pass that there's thousands of passages that you have to deal with in order to formulate your understanding of human sexuality the minute you go yeah there's only six verses that we have to look at fight of hand where you go yeah this is there's this thing called sexual orientation we know this now Paul didn't know that he offers no evidence whatsoever as to why we know this now and when I'm reading the book I'm gonna do it are you speaking French talking about oui cuz I don't know this right you say you know this I don't know this I'm looking for the page where you prove this he never does it he just assumes that everybody knows that there's actually sexual orientation in this direction never proves it and no one ever has third line of argumentation raise this argument it's I call it The Beatles theology right all you need is love love is the overarching ethic of the New Testament love is the overarching ethic of the New Testament so if two people are in a loving relationship they are expressing the height of the New Testament method well I don't agree with the Beatles theology I come more from the Tina Turner line of theology what's love got to do with it right Jesus makes it very clear when he is addressed by the Pharisees you know what teacher what's the greatest commandment in the law they're wondering is he gonna say the first or the fifth or the tenth there were different schools of thought again their question was absolutely about the Decalogue right but with which commandment you know this is the first nor the gods before me is it the fifth because it's a bridge between the first table of the law and the second table of the law the law deals with our vertical obligations toward God's second table of the law our horizontal obligations toward men which one is he gonna think Jesus as well the first and greatest commandment is love the Lord your God with all your heart all your soul and all your mind by the way that's a summary of Commandments 1 through 4 in any goes and the second is like it love your neighbor as yourself that's a summary of Commandments 5 through 10 so here's how it goes Jesus what's the greatest of the Ten Commandments is response I'm gonna have to say 1 through 4 followed closely by 5:30 by the way if you doubt that these are summaries of the law I have to do is go to Romans chapter 13 and Paul in Romans chapter 13 oh no man anything except what love love and people run there and they go see it's love not long enemy goes to the second table of the law and he talks about murder and adultery coveting and so on and so forth so clearly he's talking about the commandment that he uses the word commandment right and he says is a summary what's a summary of your neighbor as yourself is a summary of Commandments 5 through 10 there is no war between love and law I tell me how you're going to love someone while committing adultery against them how you going to love someone while murdering them how you gonna love someone walk up how you gonna love a bit but no there's no war between love and law Paul makes it very clear and Romans chapter 13 love fulfills the law because it does no wrong to a neighbor right what do we find in 1st Corinthians chapter 13 the love chapter all right it's love chapter we always want to read it our weddings business it's the love chapter and even at some of these homosexual unions they read 1st Corinthians chapter 13 because is the love chapter and after all when we get married that's what it's all about it's all about love and we stand there we want to write our own vows and so we can actually be you know unique and we stand there and say I love for you is the greatest love and the history of love and the love that I have for the love for you is more loving than any love than anyone who has ever loved before and I'm gonna love you like no love has ever loved before and this is my loving promise to you as my lover but I'm going to love you six months later I just feel like I made a mistake pastor I just I just feel like I married the wrong person really because I stood there when you was like you know love and greatest love in the history of love and y'all can't have problems like this cuz if y'all have problems and your love is the greatest love in the history of all love everybody else is in trouble so y'all better work this out but but look with me if you will just for a moment at first Corinthians chapter 13 I want you to see this and then again I promise we're going to get to the objection of the day okay first Corinthians 13 the love chapter beginning in verse 4 love is patient and kind love does not envy or boast it is not arrogant or rude it does not insist on its own way it is not irritable or resentful it does not rejoice in wrongdoing but rejoices in the truth love biblical love must never encompass homosexuality because homosexuality is by definition wrongdoing therefore rejoicing in homosexuality is not love can't be can't be cuz it's wrong door and Biblical love does not rejoice in wonder we'll talk about that more tonight now now let's get to the question that we're actually going to deal with this is the question that people are asking and it's a very popular question and the question is basically why do you pick and choose why do you pick and choose and this is one that gets us is one that stumped us is very popular I read this for you this is from from my most recent book expository apologetics in the second season of the TV show West Wing The West Wing is about the presidency in the United States West Wing the White House President Bartlet's character played by Martin Sheen obliterates a famous radio talk-show hosts who insist on calling homosexuality an abomination the woman based on a real radio personality dr. Laura Schlessinger stands there speechless while the president exposes her hypocrisy in what is viewed by many on the left as a classic example of pro-homosexual defeat of the clobber passages by the way that clobber passages are those passages those six passages that people use so in the homosexual community those are referred to as the clobber passages those six verses that that Matthew vines deals with in his book here's the scene again they're there you know in the Oval Office and there's this you know gathering of people and the president walks in and this woman who was just a crude woman who's supposed to be you know doctor law or whatever and they make you see her as a crude woman because everybody else stands up when the president walks in and she doesn't by the way the president jumps on her for that after he crushes her with this argument he says I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter in slavery he identifies her as the woman who's the radio and calls homosexuality an abomination I'm interested in selling my daughter into slavery as sanctioned in exodus 21:7 she's a Georgetown sophomore speaks fluent Italian always cleans the table when it's her turn what would be a good price for her my chief of staff Leo McGarry insists on working on the Sabbath exodus 35:2 clearly says that he should be put to death am i morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police but here's one that's really important because we got a lot of sports fans in our town touching the skin of a dead pig one unclean Leviticus 11:7 if they promise to wear gloves can the Washington Redskins play football can Notre Dame in West Point does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made of two different threads think about these things boom this episode was a huge hit homosexual groups lauded it for its brilliance reliance on the why do you pick and choose attacked gained much traction later in 2008 California was considering the controversial proposition eight which eventually passed banning same-sex unions in California by the way that's been overturned now among the many efforts to rally people in favor of homosexual unions several Hollywood stars led by Jack Black performed Proposition 8 The Musical in this short piece black played the part of Jesus and again the hypocritical use of the Levitical law was on full display examples like this are myriad I could list dozens however I share these two because of how strategic they are the first was an episode in a long-running hit television series and went for seven seasons the second was in a campaign for it is arguably the most strategic legal battle in the history of the fight for same-sex marriage these are far from obscure cultural references nor were they debates in academia or in the political arena this is ground zero a front line for the battle in the marketplace of ideas this is the perceived seat of power in this war as such at least four advantages to addressing this particular objection number one the fact that these arguments against biblical truth were so public demonstrates the amount of credence that they're given this happened on television by the way these two examples are not the only two examples this happens on television a great deal and there is nothing more researched in television this is why people pay so much money to put their ads on particular television shows and trust me if this thing didn't have traction it wouldn't be on these television shows second the public and consistent nature of these attacks means they work it means they work and they do I've actually seen it happen I've watched Christians backed into corners on college campuses in other places with this same line of argumentation really really the you eat shrimp do you report really do you do this do you do that why don't you pick and choose thirdly these are chat attacks bring the fight to our front door by making a scriptural argument this is hugely important folks people are actually entering into a Bible discussion with us voluntarily okay most time you can't get people to talk about the Bible right but on this homosexuality issue you know you bring up you know Leviticus 18 and all of a sudden their eyes get bright and they can't wait to just go at you on this and they want to have a biblical discussion that's what we want we want a biblical discussion this is an opportunity to have one they start salivating because they think oh I got you now I've seen this on the west wing I've seen this on this I've seen this on that I've tried it on my college campus Christians don't know how to answer it you're in trouble fourth if we can answer this objection we'll be prepared to deal with one of the most common obstacles facing modern apologists like a challenger who takes the champs best shot early in a heavyweight fight and keeps coming forward those who are able to withstand what the culture sees as a knockout blow to bible-thumping Christians and do so with poise and relative ease will cause their assailants to pause and think twice before they throw another punch so with that in mind let's get into it what I want to do is look at this passage in Leviticus 18 and just share with you how you can use this as a gospel opportunity because here's the deal we don't want to just win the argument about homosexuality that does not that does not do to anyone any good I win an argument with you about homosexuality and we never get to the gospel what have I accomplished absolutely nothing when you stand before God the question won't be did you stop practicing homosexuality okay what did you do with Jesus alright so we want to engage the battle on this front because it gives us the gospel opportunity I'll explain that so Leviticus 18:22 you shall not lie with a male as a woman it is an abomination it is an abomination you don't have to even quote the verse you just used the word abomination right and all of a sudden they realize oh that's Leviticus you're talking about abominations there are other things that the Bible talks about being abomination and you know you eat shrimp and you do this and you do that there are other abominations why why do you pick and choose ultimately here is the argument you are being a hypocrite you're being a hypocrite when this happens here's step one step one knock them down off their moral high horse that's step one knock them down off their moral high horse how do we do this by demonstrating that everyone picks and chooses everyone picks and Jesus what what huh yeah yeah everyone picks and chooses they just picked and chose and so I bring up this issue of abomination they go yeah you pick and choose you know there's other stuff in the law that you do that are not so immediately they feel like they now have the moral high ground but they don't and we need to let them know that they don't first of all I may say something like you know I find it very interesting that right now what you're doing is you're accusing me of hypocrisy and you're assuming that hypocrisy is a bad thing I wonder what worldview views hypocricy as a bad thing it wouldn't be the Christian worldview would it because that would mean that you're using the Christian worldview that you say you don't believe in in order to demonstrate that I'm being immoral and that I should do better which makes no sense if you don't believe in the Christian worldview there's problem number one there's problem number two problem number two you also pick and choose and you pick and choose from the vidiians oh no I don't well issue do for example in Leviticus 19 verse 11 you shall not steal you shall not deal falsely you shall not lie to one another verse 13 you shall not oppress your neighbour or rob him verse 15 you shall do no injustice in court you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor hmm it's interesting because all of those things you believe are wrong as well don't you you believe it's wrong to steal you believe it's wrong to lie you believe it's wrong to do injustice in court that's Leviticus 19 so here's what I want you to understand you're calling me a hypocrite because I choose Leviticus 18:22 and some other things in Leviticus I don't but the fact of the matter is there are things in Leviticus that you hold to as well and you don't hold to Leviticus 18:22 so let's just right now erase the whole idea of your peeling on the moral high ground because you pick and choose just like I do whoa well no I don't well but yes you do I just demonstrated that you do yeah I just I don't believe those things because they're in Leviticus I just believe those things cuz everybody knows that you weren't here before the Bible your worldview was shaped by it whether you know it or not the fact that you didn't know you pick and choose doesn't eliminate your hypocrisy you pick and choose you do so out of ignorance we can both agree but the fact of the matter is you did not invent those things they are biblical and you hold to them because you grew up in a culture that holds the biblical truth so let's just be honest here you may not have known that you pick and choose but you pick and choose but here's the other thing if you don't believe that the Bible is authoritative you have the opportunity right here and right now to say that you no longer believe that lying is wrong that robbing is wrong and that doing injustice in court is wrong because you reject Leviticus and you want your morality to not be lined up with it ready to change then you've decided to pick and choose you don't have the moral high that's step number one here's step number two step number two is the difference between your picking and choosing and my picking and choosing you didn't even know that you were picking and choosing which means that you also don't know why you're picking and choosing I on the other hand do know why I pick and choose you see there's this thing called hermeneutics and we use hermeneutics to interpret the Bible and we use hermeneutics to do things like picking and choosing in the Old Testament law I pick and choose because I understand that there are three different types of law there's moral law there's civil law and there's ceremonial law you see I understand that the moral law which is really based on the Decalogue is that law that transcends time and culture and that those are things that are true for all people in all places at all times however there is a civil law that God gave to Israel in the ancient Near East for them to function as a culture then and there those things cannot just be taken over from that culture to our own certainly there are ceremonial laws which taught Israel about its worship those things cannot just be brought over whole-hog even for example the laws and Leviticus that relate to the temple we couldn't do those things if we wanted to but here's where it gets very interesting because I'm a Christian I understand that Christ fulfilled those things in the ceremonial law that he was our once for all sacrifice for sin so that as a Christian it would actually be an abomination for me to go and offer the sacrifice of a lamb or a bull or a goat when Christ died for sin once for all the just for the unjust in order that he might bring us back to God so as a Christian I am obligated to pick and choose because Christ fulfilled the law please notice I've now gotten to the gospel in a Bible discussion that they initiated you you you see this it's a wonderful thing what are we finding really hard to do we find it really hard to get to the gospel with people right I don't want to talk about that we find it really hard to discuss the Bible with people they don't want to talk about that but on this particular issue because they have learned that this is a very successful approach to dealing with Christians on homosexuality you can get lost people to not just agree to talk with you about the Bible but to initiate and push the conversation you bring up homosexuality an abomination and here like all the whole world really why you pick and choose cuz you and it's interesting you know it's really into it because it's kind and it's almost it's almost unfair it's almost unfair I use the boxing analogy earlier you know about taking the chance best shot I'll use another analogy here you know some somebody who's somebody who's who's kind of really quick left hook and they know my left is faster than his right and if he throws his right he's in trouble how how can I make him throw his right here's the I can do it I can take my hands from here to here he looks at me and he goes oh that left hand is down low I bet I can get it but he doesn't know that what I'm thinking is the minute you do with your toast and that's kind of what we're doing we're sort of bringing the Leviticus abomination thing and they think we're coming like an innocent lamb to the slaughter and they're going oh oh oh oh it's on I got them because I'm gonna go right at them you're picking and choosing and you eat shrimp and you do this and you do that and you do the other and then all of a sudden they go how come he's not cowering in fear Fozzie smiling is you just invited me to engage in a Bible conversation with you which is what I wanted you to do from the beginning so thank you step one get off your moral high horse as you pick and choose to step two you know why you pick and choose what I do there's actually a method to my madness I understand the laws kinds of laws that we have is it always easy to figure out no it's not always easy but I have a principle that I use here's another thing I also have the example of the New Testament turn with me if you will to first Timothy you first Timothy chapter one you you and look beginning in verse nine you you now we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully understanding this that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient for the ungodly and sinners for the unholy the profane for those who strike their fathers and mother for murderers the sexually immoral me to practice homosexuality enslavers Liars perjurers and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the Blessed God with which I have been entrusted by the way of course we don't have time to deal with all this but what Paul just did was actually list Commandments one through nine in order in order and he says that they are in accordance with sound akka right there so now I have the apostle basically instructing me about the appropriateness of applying the moral law as a Christian but something else very interesting happened he also applied the Decalogue to homosexuality so the ban on homosexuality is consistent with the morality and ethics of the Ten Commandments not according to me but according to the Apostle Paul this goes back to what we talked about earlier remember what Matthew vines did Matthew vine said if you want to deal with homosexuality there's only six passages in the whole Bible that you have to deal with just six well the fact of the matter is when you understand what Paul just did in this paragraph what you realize is that according to the Apostle Paul the Decalogue itself prohibits homosexuality fines doesn't deal with this course he would so now what do we have now we have the New Testament actually doing the same thing and teaching me as a Christian how to do this same thing now the last step is this and this is a really important step we end where we begin we begin by what knocking them off their moral high horse you know where we hand by getting us off our own see what they think just happened is we just switched the moral argument what they think just happened is that we just went so you thought you were the moral one I'm actually the moral one mm-hmm that's not where we in that's not where we end here's here's where I end this argument I end this argument by saying you know why this is important to me this is important to me because you're right about one thing I am a hypocrite I know that I am I admit that I am I'm a sinner in need of a savior and left to my own devices hypocrisy is the only thing that I would produce so I don't know about you but I am in desperate need of a moral standard and is outside of myself because if I don't have a moral standard outside of myself my tendency is to always consider the things that I approve of to be the moral ones and the things that I disapprove of to be the immoral ones and I become a law unto myself and the reason that I need to know what God says is righteous and what God says is unrighteous is because I am a hypocrite I admit that and it's because I admit that that I've been able to throw myself on God's mercy it's because I admit that that I am able to trust in the finished work of Jesus Christ who kept the whole law where I could not and that was very important because that means that he could impute to meet his righteousness he kept the whole lot he was righteous and his righteousness has been imputed to me but then beyond that in his active obedience there's his passive obedience and in his passive obedience he received in himself the penalty that I owed because of my unrighteousness so now there's a double imputation so my hypocrisy is cast on Christ and his righteousness is cast on me and I don't stand in front of you holier-than-thou I stand in front of you washed clean by the blood of the Lamb who laid down his life for sinners like me and I trust him as my righteousness and my only hope to stand before God justified one day and I did not engage in this conversation with you because I think I'm superior to you I engaged in this conversation with you because I know that I'm not and I'm just one beggar telling another bigger where I found bread this is how we answer the question why do you make and choose that's great you gracious God our Father we confess to you that we are sinners in desperate need of a savior and that left to our own devices we are self-righteous self-justifying and we always close the door to heaven right behind us we always define the acceptable level of righteousness as our level of righteousness grant by your grace that this might not be so and that as we address this ever important issue homosexuality and same-sex marriage and we not allow it to be just another opportunity for us to look at the speck in our brother's eye and ignore the login arrow grant that we might be billed as lions and make a sheet and that in doing so we might have many opportunities proclaim marvelous mercies of Christ to those who so desperately need to know may we never be more passionate about winning a moral argument than we are about winning a soul grant this we pray in Christ's name and for his sake you you we're grateful for that sharing here enjoy its being loud and clear we are going to rise and sing I am dying you you

Channel: Peter Salas

Views: 22,319

Rating: 4.8253078 out of 5

Keywords:

Id: HfbxxFA_oP4

Length: 50min 52sec (3052 seconds)

Published: Mon Jan 28 2019