Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘God’s Word’

Too Fearful to Mentor

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Identity, Life issues, Relationships, Vocation, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 9, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Where are the mentors?  They are us!

They are older women — in age, experience, or spiritual maturity.  Unfortunately, too many of us seem to fear the concept of mentoring.

Yes, we may mentor a child at school.  Yes, we may mentor through a “Big Sister” program.  But, mentoring Biblical womanhood is counter-cultural.  There is strong resistance.  Obstacles stand in the way.  There are two: the younger women and the older woman.

The younger woman is, quite honestly, the least problematic.  Why?  Because younger women naturally resist mentoring.  The younger generation always considers itself more enlightened.  It’s typical for a young woman to consider herself more progressive than her mother or grandmother and, therefore, want to leave “old ways” behind.  Even when a younger woman is willing to learn some things from an older woman, she may still believe (as I’ve been told): “The culture is different than it was when you were my age.”  Well, the culture is always different with every new generation.  But, Truth never changes.

The greater obstacle to mentoring Biblical womanhood is the older woman.  It is the older woman who resists the opportunity to mentor.  Why?  Maybe because we are afraid.  Perhaps we’re afraid to mentor because it means we have to act our age.  Perhaps we’re afraid to mentor because it means re-visiting our past mistakes and becoming vulnerable all over again.  Perhaps we’re afraid to mentor because we fear rejection by younger women.

Some of us might be afraid because we are untrained.  Perhaps no one mentored us with God’s Word.  Perhaps we were led off the good path of life on painful and dangerous detours by older men and women we trusted more than God.  Perhaps a parent, professor, friend or even a pastor that we trusted had been deceived by “silly myths” and passed them on to us.  Out of respect for them, we may feel defensive about what they taught us.  The ideas to which we cling.  But, letting the light of God’s Word illuminate the dark corners of our minds, may we move out of a defensive posture.  Lift up in prayer the person who passed wrong ideas on to us.  Let go of “silly myths” and deception.

I’m a baby-boomer.  Talk about a generation influenced by “silly myths!”  My generation was raised with no boundaries; told to obsess on our bodies; dared to compete with men; and sent to the university where marriage, family, and the church were mocked and boldly dismantled.

The fact is, we can’t mentor if we’re afraid to act our age.  If we don’t want to accept where we’re at in life.  If we’re afraid to re-visit our past and acknowledge our failures.  If we’re afraid of rejection.  In other words, we can’t mentor if it’s all about me.

I can’t mentor if it’s all about me.  My fears.  My inabilities.  My past.  I can’t make a positive difference in my world if it’s all about me.  I can, however, make a life-changing difference if I’m all about God.  God’s Word.  God’s Word in Jesus Christ.  It is God’s Word that tells me who I am and why I exist.  Trusting the Word, I don’t need to fear myself or the world.

As an older woman, I think God wants me to accept my age.  My experiences.  My failures.  My disappointments.  Then, making use of all of these, He wants me to warn.  Train.  Equip the younger women He places in my life.  There is only one thing necessary for me to mentor: His Word.  Trusting God’s Word and using it makes me wise.  Willing.  Confident.  Less focused on self and more focused on others.

The world is not my friend.  Recognizing this, I (and all older women) mentor with the Word of God.  Away from “silly myths.”  Toward hope.

Read Full Post »

Home Town

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Faith & Practice, Relationships, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 7, 2011| Leave a Comment »

This week I will be speaking twice.  In my home town.

I am nervous.  Unable to focus.  Doubtful.   It isn’t that I doubt the mentoring ministry I represent.   Nearly every day I see evidence that our culture has lost its way.  That we’ve forgotten (or never been told) how to live as men and women.   The Word of God compels me more today than it did when I was first nudged from my comfort zone to begin Titus 2 for Life.

But, I’m a person affected by environment.  I’ve been known to take a candle along with me on a trip just in case the hotel room is cold and unwelcoming.  I’m also affected by other people.  It matters to me that relationships are built, not destroyed.   I’m acutely aware of body language.  Once, while speaking about a controversial issue, I heard a scribbling noise.  To my side, a woman was pressing her pencil hard on a page in her study guide.  Head bent down, whole body engaged, she blackened the paper with great sweeping motions.   Was she angry… or hurting?   Whichever, she had my attention: How should I respond?

So, what happens when speaking in my own home town?  To the people with whom I live?  I’m extra sensitive to my closest neighbors and tender relationships.  Differing perspectives.  Maturity and immaturity.  A sense — or lack — of humor.  Personal history.  Agreement.  Disagreement.  Defenses down… or up.  Do I only imagine it, or does the room close in?  Confuse my thoughts?  Leave me a bumbling fool?   What words can I utter that will be right for everyone?  These people with real lives… my closest neighbors?

His Words.  Not mine.  His Truth.  Not my opinion.

Every word of God proves true; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him.  Do not add to His words . . . (Proverbs 30:5).”

I covet your prayer: His Truth from my mouth.  For the sake of my neighbors.

Maybe I will take a candle.

Read Full Post »

Science & Faith: Part II

Posted in Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Identity, Life issues, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 2, 2011| Leave a Comment »

In his article, “Are We Dumb and Getting Dumber?,” Regis Nicoll writes, “Distinguishing between science and faith is problematic, given that there is more than a little measure of faith in science; especially, materialistic science:

  • Faith that nature is a mechanism that can be explained by physical laws,
  • Faith that those laws are universal and unchanging,
  • Faith that our senses reliably perceive the world as it really is,
  • Faith that our minds accurately interpret those perceptions, and
  • Faith that the origin, diversity, and complexity of nature is the unguided product of chance and necessity.”  (Breakpoint – Published May 6, 2011)

Nicoll continues, “Similarly, discriminating conventional wisdom from actual wisdom is difficult-to-impossible, given their considerable overlap.  The conventional wisdom that ‘what goes up, must come down,’ is congruent with the actual wisdom of Newton’s laws.  In the same way, conventional beliefs about things like murder, cruelty and rape accord with the universal conviction of their actual immorality.”

Nicoll notes that, “Our real challenge is not discerning between such false dichotomies but discerning science from science fiction and truth from falsehood.  When a frog-turned-prince tale is dismissed as myth until the time frame is changed from a bibbidi-bobbidi-boo instant to 150 million years, it signals a discernment deficit.  When the time frame is extended to a few billion years to spin a neutrino-turned-prince tale, it signals a discernment crisis.”

Who are the “gatekeepers” of truth?  Nicoll recalls a NOVA special featuring an astrophysicist who stated, “We’re descended from neutrinos!”  Then, after a reverential pause, he added, “They’re our parents.”  (This… from an astrophysicist?  He’s joking, right?)  Nicoll writes, “The gatekeepers have spun many an imaginative yarn about how the universe came to be and how matter ‘went live.’  But despite the intellectual charm of creative neutrinos, cosmic inflation, multiverses, emergence, abiogenesis, and the like, their ever-inventive tales remain, and will always remain, just that: tales with no more claim to truth than those of a court astrologer.”

I came across Nicoll’s article in Breakpoint (5-6-11) while trying to respond to my agnostic friend.  He’s the one who threw into the “hopper of our discussion” the quote from William Inge (see Part I, previous post).   I explained to my friend that I am a builder of relationships.  I am a woman who, because of both facts and faith, accepts and finds joy in my defined role of “helper.”  My Biblical worldview defines my role in Genesis 2:18.  “The the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.’ ”  (The Hebrew word for “helper” is ezer, which elsewhere in Scripture also means “assistant” or “ally.”  Thus, my blog name ezerwoman.  In no way do I find “helper” to be inferior; rather, I find order, sanity, and hope in a chaotic, insane, and hopeless world.)  As a builder of relationships and a “helper,” I could have been blessed with a brain that easily processes scientific data and enjoys doing so.  But, no.  Such a brain belongs to my husband and sons.  Nevertheless, I do possess reason and logic.  My reason and logic agrees with Nicoll when it comes to these “gatekeepers of truth.”

Nicoll writes, “The idea that ‘in the beginning were neutrinos’ that went bump in the cosmos to form intelligent beings is as fantastic (more so, really) as the Mayan account that ‘in the beginning were only Tepeu and Gucumatz . . .[who] sat together and thought, and whatever they thought came into being.’ ”

Are we witnessing an intentional change in education?  Isn’t the proper goal of education to teach students how to think, not what to think?

“Intelligent design and Darwinism,” writes Nicoll, “are controversial theories that enjoy wide currency in the marketplace of ideas.  Teaching one theory to the exclusion of others, and without presenting its weaknesses along with its strengths, is indoctrination, not education.”

Read Full Post »

Science & Faith: Part I

Posted in Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Identity, Life issues, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 2, 2011| Leave a Comment »

“Science . . . contemplates a world of facts without values,” wrote William Inge, but “religion contemplates values apart from facts.”

What is “religion?”  Doesn’t everyone have a “religion,” a worldview upon which they stand?  True to their “religion” or worldview, don’t they practice it “religiously?”  My worldview determines how I see and respond to everything.  Faith in my worldview compels me to study and weigh facts.  It also compels me to set higher standards (values).  Together, these facts and values determine how I think, live, and treat myself and others.

My worldview tells me that science/facts and “religion” (faith)/values are not exclusive of one another.  The atheist and I both put our faith in something; then we, true to our faith, practice it.  The atheist doesn’t want to believe in an authority higher than himself.  I, however, have discovered that when I place myself on the throne of “authority,” I put myself and others at risk.

Facts are necessary.  Facts include more than science but also history and consequences of behavior.  My faith in God’s Word of Scripture, for example, is not without fact.  The Bible is fact.  It is recorded history.  It is eye-witness accounts.  Father telling son or Jew telling Gentile.  The Bible is backed up by facts.  Archeological evidence and scientific documentation abound.  My worldview impresses upon me the need for such facts over and above feelings and opinion.  I cannot trust my feelings.  They change with mood and circumstance.  My opinion is biased.  The law of gravity, on the other hand, is fact.  So are history and experience.  So, while I may feel like jumping off the roof of my house, it serves me well to remember that when my dad jumped off the roof of a barn, he broke his arches.  The law of gravity, together with history and experience, are beneficial to me.  Faith enters in for both the atheist and myself as a Christian, most especially when something happens that we didn’t see or can’t explain.  Both the atheist and I will act as people of faith: faith in something.  I didn’t see my dad jump off the barn.  I didn’t hear his cry.  Even though I can’t explain exactly what happened, I have faith in what my dad told me.  Faith in his words prevents me from a foolish (and painful)  jump.

Let’s assume, as Richard Dawkins insists, that there is no creator.  No creator of all that ever has or ever will exist; no creator of persons (bodies, minds, and souls); no creator of boundaries for the function, care and protection of those persons; no creator of conscience; no creator of all things right, honorable, merciful, and true.  In such a world, I become the “authority” of my life and Dawkins becomes the “authority” of his.  But, what values do we harmoniously work with for the benefit of community?  My values will be shaped by my “god” (me) and his will be shaped by his “god” (him).

Let’s be honest… and willing to expose our core faith.

Someone like Dawkins doesn’t want to acknowledge the Creator God who brings order out of chaos.  He resists the valid conclusion of both faith and science that Someone higher than himself exists.  Yet, in reality, he’s putting his faith in something.  Himself!  His core faith is himself!  He may claim to wrap himself in science and demean those of faith.  Nevertheless, he is practicing his faith.  And his values, like all values, flow out of his faith: whatever he believes in.

Science and facts divorced from faith and values?  No.  All are interrelated.  The more I study God’s Word and the more I am informed by facts — of biology, anatomy, archeology, and history, the more I recognize God at work.  Intelligent and orderly design.  “For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.  For His invisible attributes, namely, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made.  So they are without excuse” (Romans 1:19-20).

At the end of his life, Charles Darwin reflected on his work and confessed, “I was a  young man with unformed ideas.  I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything; and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire.  People made a religion of them.”

Louis Pasteur declared in one of his lectures, “Science brings man nearer to God.”

Read Full Post »

Bearers & Defenders of Life

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Identity, Life issues, Vocation, tagged , , , , , , , , , , on May 24, 2011| 1 Comment »

I don’t apologize for a Biblical worldview.  It answers the important questions: Who am I?   From where did I come?  What is my purpose?  Why do bad things happen?  Is there hope?

So, as I continue to ponder the topic of women in combat, I do best to use God’s Word on the topic.

According to Genesis, man was created to be the defender of life.  He is the steward over all.  God gave to man the instructions for life and the warnings against death.  Sin messed up the perfect world, but God still used His created order for the benefit of women, children, and society.  Man would continue in his roles of stewardship and defense as husband, father, and warrior.

Woman was created to be man’s helper.  She would help him be a good steward over all of life.  Together with God, the two would procreate new life, but the woman alone would bear that life from conception until birth.  Sin may change how some women feel about motherhood but, nonetheless, women are still the bearers of life.  Generational hope comes through the womb.

So… what sane and civilized people would send the bearers of life to be targets for the enemy’s bullets?

I began really paying attention to what was happening in our military during the Gulf War.  A photo in the Dallas Morning News (2/20/91) of Spec. Hollie Vallance tugged at my mother’s heart.  Dressed in fatigues and helmet, Hollie was holding her 7 month-old baby in a final good-bye before being sent away.  She was quoted, “I never really thought about going into combat.  I never dreamed anything like this would happen in my lifetime, let alone right after I had my first child.”  She continued, “I’ve built an ice wall around my heart to try to cool the pain, and sometimes I worry that my husband and baby daughter won’t be able to melt it away.”  Hollie’s husband was quoted, “It isn’t that she’s a woman that makes it harder.  It’s that she has a baby.  I’m afraid Hollie might not be the same person when she comes back.”

Bearers of life on the front lines of battle.  Mothers separating from children.  What about womanliness itself?  The female anatomy?  A woman marine who served in Iraq as a Humvi driver explained that she would go all day without water.  It was one thing for men to stay hydrated because relieving themselves is a simple procedure and requires no bush.  But, it’s both difficult and risky for a female soldier.   First, it’s awkward to manipulate the clothing of war.  Second, if there is a bush for privacy, does walking to it require leaving a safe zone?  What about that time of month?  What about shared living space with men?   I know a guardsman who, while serving time in the Persian Gulf, had to share his tent with a woman soldier.  It mattered to him… because he was married.

Most men I know believe in chivalry.  Chivalry was first practiced by Jesus Christ.  He literally sacrificed His life for His Bride, the Church.  He laid down His own life so that she might be spared.  Although not every man on board the sinking Titanic was a Christian, most all practiced chivalry.  It was, after all, the rule of the sea: Women and children into the lifeboats first.  Men, whether they knew it or not, were influenced by God’s Word for life.  So, what does a chivalrous male soldier do if a woman soldier is being attacked?  If she is taken prisoner?  Sexually abused?  In battle, is she “just one of the guys?”  But, not in battle, is she different?  What is the price of honorable — or dishonorable — sexual distraction?

Memorial Day approaches.  I wonder what our veterans would have to say about “equal rights” on the beaches of Normandy or Iwo Jima?   About “equal opportunity” for the bearers of life to unload from amphibious transport onto the open spaces of water and sand under enemy fire?

I think I know.

Read Full Post »

Position on Gay “Marriage”

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Faith & Practice, Identity, Relationships, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 11, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Read Full Post »

Hope… and Change

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Identity, Life issues, Relationships, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on April 29, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Much dialogue followed the front page story and photo in my hometown newspaper.  What would one expect after reading the headline: “Mr. & Mr.”?  Discussions have been sane and civil.  No voices raised.  No anger.  Some disagreement, yes.  Concern, yes.  Disappointment, yes.  But,  no hateful words.

Then arrived in my mail a simple but hand-written note from Exodus International.  Exodus is a ministry for those leaving the homosexual lifestyle.  When others ask, “Is there hope?  Is change possible?,” Exodus follows the example of Christ by walking the journey with struggling people.  Exodus doesn’t just speak God’s Word.  It makes use of it.   Over a period of years, I have kept my eye on this organization, watching to see how they treat people.  How they respond to attacks from their opposition.  Who funds them.  Why they continue to exist.  I donate to this ministry, recommend them to others, and offer their resources.  Exodus takes prayer requests from those on their mailing list.  Following the “marriage” of the two young men in my community, I asked the Exodus staff to include these two men in their prayers.

A few days later, I received a hand-written note.  “Dear Linda,” it read, “Thank you so much for your support.  Today in our prayer time, we prayed for the two young men you mentioned in your community.  We will continue to lift you and your family up as well.  God bless!”  It was signed,  “In Christ’s name, Janine.”

Exodus took my prayer request seriously.  They “heard” and responded with a promise to rely not on themselves, but on God.  This personal note was evidence that Exodus takes the struggle of homosexuality seriously.  When this ministry speaks of “hope” and “change,” it speaks not in human terms, but Godly.  Exodus is bold in Jesus’ name because they have evidenced the hope that comes with changed behavior.  Exodus does not shame those they serve, but treats them with a compassion not unlike Jesus who reached out to include those who didn’t seem to fit this or that mold.

Too many people don’t want to believe that change in behavior is possible.  The ministry of Exodus is opposed by gay and lesbian advocacy groups.  But, the stories of men and women who have found hope in changed behavior witness to me of what happens when we stop resisting the Word of Christ and trust Him with our lives.

The media doesn’t sing the praises of Exodus and other ex-gay ministries.  But, if one is really interested in the souls of their neighbors, they might want to visit Exodus.

Read Full Post »

Everyone Has Right to Marry (the opposite sex)

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Citizenship, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Relationships, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 15, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Three Iowa Supreme Court justices were ousted last November because the court re-defined marriage and allowed homosexuals the right to marry each other.  Months later, opinions are divided.  Some maintain that the supremes were acting exactly as they should: safeguarding the rights of an unpopular group from a discriminatory act.

Judge Richard Posner would dispute that.  Posner, a widely respected judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit said in a public interview, “Nothing in the Constitution or its history suggests a constitutional right to homosexual marriage.  If there is such a right, it will have to be manufactured by the justices out of whole cloth.  The exercise of so freewheeling a judicial discretion in the face of adamantly opposed public opinion would be seriously undemocratic.  It would be a matter of us judges, us enlightened ones, forcing our sophisticated views on a deeply unwilling population.”

Put simply, when the law defines marriage as between one man and one woman, it does not prohibit any person practicing a homosexual lifestyle from marrying.  They would just have to marry in the same way that everyone else in society has to marry — namely, they would have to marry someone of the opposite sex.  This right is extended equally to all unmarried adults in the society.

When a person practicing a homosexual lifestyle claims they want to marry another person of the same sex, he or she is claiming a new right that had not previously been available to anyone in this society.  Such a right has been denied to everyone in the society prior to this time, so it is not discriminating against them to say that this kind of right is denied to them.

Let’s use another example.  A man wanting to marry his sister may claim he has the right that everyone else has: the right to marry.  But that’s an invalid argument.  The law prohibits such marriage.  When the law denies this man the right to marry his sister, it isn’t denying him anything that it doesn’t also deny everybody else as well.  In truth, this man is really claiming that he has the right to redefine marriage according to his own desires and preferences.  And he’s not just claiming a private right, but a right to redefine the institution of marriage for the whole of society.

There is so much more to be said, but let me offer one more thought.  Laws in any society have a teaching function.  The kinds of relationships that are approved by the law are more likely to be approved of and followed by the society as a whole.  People will reason, “This is according to the law, therefore it must be right.”  This happened with Roe vs. Wade: “Abortion is legal, therefore it must be right.”  50+ million babies in the U.S. died by the hand of abortionists since that court decision in 1973.

I am called to put my trust in the One who created the institution of marriage and who, therefore, defines it.  It is not for me — or anyone else — to tamper with what God has made.  Government, another institution created by God, is called upon to maintain the standard of what constitutes marriage.  Failing to do this results in societal chaos and great harm to children — the very ones marriage is designed to protect.

I was among those who voted not to retain three Iowa supreme court justices.  This wasn’t because I don’t consider all people — no matter their color, ethnicity, religion, or lifestyle choice — to be equally human under God.  Rather, it was my civic duty to say “no” to anyone’s “right” to redefine marriage, to remind judges that the law they make has a teaching function, and to act as someone accountable to the most Supreme Judge.

(SOURCE: Politics According to the Bible
by Wayne Grudem, Zondervan, pp 229-230)

Read Full Post »

Evidence for “Not a Scientist”

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Commentaries of others, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Life issues, Relationships, Vocation, tagged , , , , , , , , , on April 6, 2011| 4 Comments »

Mr. “Not a Scientist” said he values substantive information, not vague claims or opinions.  To accomodate, I’m offering a few selected resources.

Jeffrey Satinover, a psychiatrist who is a graduate of MIT, Harvard, and the University of Texas and has lectured at both Yale and harvard, reports some of the medical harm that is typically associated with male homosexual practice:

  • A twenty-five to thirty-year decrease in life expectancy
  • Chronic, potentially fatal, liver disease — infectious heptatitis
  • Inevitably fatal immune disease including associated cancers
  • Frequently fatal rectal cancer
  • Multiple bowel and other infectious diseases
  • A much higher than usual incidence of suicide

Satinover also points out a significant contrast in the sexual behaviors of heterosexual and homosexual persons.  Among heterosexuals, sexual faithfulness was relatively high: “90 percent of heterosexual women and more than 75 percent of heterosexual men have never engaged in extramarital sex.”  But among homosexual men the picture is far different:

  • A 1981 study revealed that only 2 percent of homosexuals were monogamous or semi-monogamous — generally defined as ten or fewer lifetime partners . . .
  • A 1978 study found that 43 percent of male homosexuals estimated having sex with five hundred or more different partners . . . Seventy-nine percent said that more than half of these partners were strangers.   (Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth by Jeffrey Satinover, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996)

Society should encourage and reward marriage between one man and one woman.  All societies need babies to survive, and Biblical marriage is the best environment for having babies.  Societies should encourage an institution that provides this best kind of environment for raising children.  A married man and woman raise and nurture children far better than any other human relationship or institution.  The benefits that husband and wife (father and mother) bring to their children are numerous.  Children who live with their own two traditionally-married parents:

  • Have significantly higher educational achievement. 
  • Are much more likely to enjoy a better economic standard in their adult lives and are much less likely to end up in poverty.
  • Have much better physical and emotional health.
  • Are far less likely to commit crimes, are less likely to engage in alcohol and substance abuse, and are more likely to live according to higher standards of integrity and moral principles.
  • Are less likely to experience physical abuse and more likely to live in homes that provide support, protection, and stability for them.

Children who live with their own two traditionally-married parents are more likely to establish stable families in the next generation.  Traditional marriage:

  • Provides a guarantee of lifelong companionship and care far better than any other human relationship or institution.
  • Leads to a higher economic standard and diminished likelihood of ending up in poverty for men and women.
  • Provides women with protection against domestic violence and abandonment far better than any other human relationship or institution.
  • Encourages men to socially beneficial pursuits far better than any other human relationship or institution.
  • Provides a healthy environment for sexual faithfulness (men and women have an innate instinct that values sexual faithfulness) far better than any other human relationship or institution.
  • Provides greater protection against sexually transmitted diseases than any other relationship or institution.
  • Honors the biological design of men’s and women’s bodies that argues that sexual intimacy is designed to be enjoyed between only one man and one woman.  (The above is documented by Wayne Grudem in Politics According to the Bible (Zondervan, 2010, pp 224-225). 

God created marriage between one man and one woman.  We cannot change the “fit” and still call it marriage.  Now, it is something else.  Marriage is the building block of any stable society.  Any society that wants to remain healthy and stable must have governments that encourage, protect, and reward marriage between one man and one woman.  In turn, marriage and family give back to society in immeasureable ways. 

There are countless resources for the curious.  I value the following:

Joseph Nicolosi, President of the National Association for the Research and Treatment of Homosexuality

Exodus International, a ministry for those leaving the muck and mire of homosexuality and starting new lives

Stand to Reason, apologetics for both Christian and non-Christian 

The Family Research Council (click on:  “Marriage and Human Sexuality”)

Focus on the Family

Unwanted Harvest by Mona Riley and Brad Sargent

A Strong Delusion: Confronting the”Gay Christian” Movement by Joe Dallas

The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today by Alan Sears and Craig Osten

Read Full Post »

Oh, Gentlemen!

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Identity, Life issues, Relationships, Vocation, tagged , , , , , , , , , on December 20, 2010| Leave a Comment »

Gentlemen.  What words are there for you?  As a mom, I can speak to my sons about women.  I can describe feelings, emotions, and the complexities of my gender.  But, any wisdom and true instruction I have for men comes only from God.

“The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it.  And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, ‘You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die'” (Genesis 2:15-17).

“. . . [T]he man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden.  But the Lord God called to the man and said to him, ‘Where are you?'” (vv. 8-9).

God created man to be the head and steward of His creation.  It is to man that God gave the words of life and the warning away from death.  Man was to pass on the Word of Truth — to his wife, their children, and their children’s children.  Even though the woman was the first to disobey God, man was held responsible.  Such is the order of God’s creation.  Even after sin, God brings order out of chaos using the leadership of godly men.

“Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her, that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of the water with the word, so that He might present the church to Himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.  In the same way husbands should love their wives as they love their own bodies.  He who loves his wife loves himself.  For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of His body” (Ephesians 5:25-30).

The husband is not to rule his wife, but to love her (Colossians 3:19).  St. Paul wrote more to the husband than to the wife because it is an opportunity to rejoice in the Gospel.  If a husband’s love for his wife is Christlike, he is willing to give up his very life for her (Galatians 2:20; Titus 2:14; 1 John 3:16).  St. Paul notes that the husband is the “head” in a marriage.  Perhaps it follows, then, that the wife is the “heart.”  One is not more important than the other; both are necessary for life.  Neither man nor woman honor God or themselves by asking: “What can I get out of this marriage?”  Instead, everything a husband  — or a wife — does should be a living illustration of Christ’s love.

“Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered” (1 Peter 3:7).

Feminists may be offended by the expression “weaker vessel.”  But, as students of history, we do well to remember that the culture of the Apostle Peter’s time had little respect for women.  For this reason, the apostle was guided to choose his words with express care for women.  Physically, women are typically smaller in size and weaker in strength then men, which could make them vulnerable to abuse.  Peter admonishes husbands not to exploit a woman’s size and strength in unkind ways.  Viewing husband and wife through Biblical eyes, each was made to complement the other.  Both are heirs of God’s saving grace.

What about the unmarried man?  How is he to treat a girl or woman?  St. Paul prepares the young man Timothy for ministry with these words:

“Do not rebuke an older man but encourage him as you would a father, younger men as brothers, older women as mothers, younger women as sisters, in all purity” (1 Timothy 5:1-2).

A man is called by God to treat all people as Jesus did — as members of His own family (Matthew 12:46-50).  Here is a culturally-transforming opportunity for men.  Can you imagine how esteemed and safe women — and, therefore, children — would be if they were treated like mothers and sisters?

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »